erfifel 


Vt'cbepic 

iocp.D.D 


1 

Shelf 

PRINCETON,    N.^   J.                         ^* 

Division.  jD^.U.^  H  7 

Section    ,.SZXL.CL..CL...                                      1 

Number 

1 

^.' 

1 

* 

'S 

1 

1 

-;■-:"' 

',1 

-,, 

'  ■':'> 
'"J  ' 

V :  - 

\jr 


THE 


OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS 


IN 


THEIR  MUTUAL  RELATIONS 


BY 

FREDERIC  Gardiner,  d.d. 

PROFESSOR    IN   THE    BERKELEY   DIVINITY   SCHOOL. 
AUTHOR    OF    "HARMONY    OF    THE    GOSPELS    IN    GREEK,"  ETC. 


NEW  YORK 

JAMES   POTT   &   CO.,  PUBLISHERS 

14  AND  16  AsTOR  Place 

1885 


Copyright,  1885, 
By  JAMES  POTT  &  CO. 


Pressof  J.J.  Little  &  Co., 
Nos.  10  to  20  Astor  Place,  New  York. 


^%xl  of  ^rinc^^r; 


PREFACE. 


The  following  pages  give  the  substance  of  a  course 
of  lectures  in  the  Berkeley  Divinity  School.  In  pre- 
paring them  for  the  press  two  changes  have  been 
made:  as  far  as  possible  everything  technical  has 
been  omitted,  and  especially  the  use  of  Hebrew  and 
Greek  words,  that  the  matter  may  be  more  easily 
intelligible  to  a  larger  circle ;  and  the  division  of  the 
lectures  into  portions  occupying  nearly  equal  times 
has  been  neglected  for  the  more  convenient  arrange- 
ment of  the  subjects.  With  these  modifications  the 
lectures  remain  substantially  as  they  were  delivered, 
and  are  printed  in  accordance  with  the  wish  of  those 
who  heard  them. 

There  have  been  many  works,  both  elaborate  and 
popular,  upon  the  same  general  subject ;  but  none 
of  them  cover  exactly  the  same  ground,  or  supply 
the  want  these  lectures  were  designed  to  fill. 

F.  G. 

MiDDLETOWN,  CONN.,  /tine,  1884. 


CONTENTS 


LECTURE  I.    The  Essential  Unity  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments i 

Both  come  from  God  and  are  written  by  men.  Differences 
arising  plainly  from  time  and  circumstances.  Christ  taught 
that  the  New  Covenant  was  the  culmination  of  the  Old. 
His  disciples  did  the  same.  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 
Other  epistles,  addressed  to  Gentiles.  Common  object  of 
both.  Nevertheless  there  are  great  differences.  Anthropo- 
morphism. Progress  in  revelation.  The  laws  of  marriage  ; 
of  revenge  ;  of  slavery.  The  federal  and  individual  relations 
of  man.     The  wars  of  Israel.     Sacrifice.    Faith.    Summary. 

LECTURE  II.     The  Progressive  Character  of  Revela- 
tion      28 

On  h  prioii  ground  it  must  have  been  progressive.  The 
records  of  revelation  which  have  been  preserved  the  only 
basis  of  discussion.  The  ordinarily  accepted  order  of  reve- 
lation accepted  as  a  "working  hypothesis."  because  best 
in  accordance  with  the  phenomena.  The  smallness  of  reve- 
lation at  the  birth  of  Abraham.  The  Mosaic  legislation 
and  subsequent  prophetic  teaching  ;  their  harmony,  yet  the 
latter  an  advance.  The  theories  which  reverse  this  order, 
and  the  objections  to  them.  The  progress  of  revelation  in 
the  New  Testament.     Summary. 

LECTURE  III.     The   Old   Testament  Preparatory  for 

the  New 62 

The  Old  Testament  prepared  for  the  New,  and  was  given 
for  this  purpose.     The  evidence  from  the  calling  of  Israel  ; 


VI  CONTENTS, 

PAGE 

from  its  history  ;  from  the   consciousness  of  the   people 
from  prophecy  ;  from  the  teaching  of  the  New  Testament. 
The  conduct  of  the  heroes  of  the  Old  Testament ;  Abraham  ; 
Jacob  ;  the  Judges  ;  David. 

LECTURE  IV.     The  Relation   of  the  Precepts  of  the 
Law  to  the  Gospel 90 

The  precepts  arranged  in  classes  ;  national  precepts  were 
preparatory  for  the  Gospel  by  separating  the  people  from 
contaminations  of  the  heathen  ;  educational  precepts,  by 
teaching  them  in  concrete  form  until  they  should  be  able  to 
receive  principles  ;  typical,  by  symbolically  foreshadowing 
truths  they  were  yet  unable  to  understand  in  their  full  and 
clear  expression.  Particular  precepts  concerning  the  sacri- 
fices and  the  priesthood. 

LECTURE  V.     Sacrifice in 

The  Patriarchal  sacrifices,  burnt  offerings  and  peace  offer- 
ings. The  sacrifices  of  the  Law.  The  Passover.  Four 
general  classes,  with  some  subdivisions  and  special  sacrifices. 
The  burnt  offering,  with  its  ritual  and  significance.  The 
peace  offerings.  The  sin  and  trespass  offerings.  The  day  of 
Atonement.  The  sacrifices  had  a  certain  absolute  ceremo- 
nial value,  but  were  intrinsically  insufiicient  for  the  forgive- 
ness of  sin.  Treatment  of  the  sacrifices  by  the  Prophets. 
Their  relation  to  the  Gospel.  The  consciousness  of  sin,  the 
holiness  of  God,  and  His  unity  ;  the  necessity  of  the  shed- 
ding of  blood  ;  the  personal  act  of  the  worshipper  ;  the 
character  of  the  offerer  ;  the  intervention  of  an  authorized 
mediator ;  the  equality  of  men  before  God  ;  the  insuffi- 
ciency of  the  sacrifices  in  themselves  and  the  consequent 
prophecy  contained  in  them. 

LECTURE  VI.     The  Priesthood 138 

Priesthood  and  sacrifice  correlative  terms.  At  first  the  head 
of  the  family,  then  of  the  tribe,  and  finally  the  monarch,  the 
priest,  and  this  made  necessary  the  appointment  of  an  order 
of  priests.  In  Israel  the  priests  always  sharply  separated 
from  the  monarchs.  At  first  no  monarchs.  The  priests  ap- 
pointed by  God  as  mediators  for  their  people.     The  various 


CONTENTS.  Vll 

PAGE 

duties.  Types  of  Christ,  in  several  points.  They  could  be 
only  typical.  Christ  the  only  true  priest.  The  word  never 
applied  in  the  New  Testament  to  Christian  Ministers.  The 
relation  between  the  two  Dispensations  in  the  priesthood. 

LECTURE  VII.     The  Kingdom  of   God 149 

Ordinarily  the  constitution  of  society  has  passed  from  the 
tribal  to  the  monarchical.  In  Israel  this  process  was  arrested 
that  the  nation  might  be  under  the  immediate  government 
of  God.  Afterwards  a  monarchy  was  conceded  to  the  sinful- 
ness of  the  people,  but  only  on  condition  that  it  should  con- 
tinue a  theocracy.  When  Solomon  attempted  to  pervert  it 
into  an  earthly  empire,  the  nation  was  broken  up.  The  idea 
of  a  kingdom  under  an  invisible  King  was  always  made 
prominent.  Combined  with  this  was  the  primeval  promise 
with  its  various  renewals,  and  the  teachings  of  the  prophets. 
A  kingdom  of  righteousness  was  foretold.  The  people 
were  thus  prepared  for  the  announcement  of  ' '  the  kingdom 
of  God"  in  the  New  Testament.  There  it  appears  as  a 
development  and  present  realization  of  the  teachings  of  the 
Old  Testament.  The  part  of  the  prophets  in  connection 
with  this  kingdom.  In  both  Testaments  this  kingdom  is 
based  upon  the  idea  of  a  Covenant.  The  worship  of  this 
kingdom  of  old  and  under  the  Gospel. 

LECTURE  VIII.    Prophecy 170 

Definition  of  the  term.  Proofs  of  the  existence  of  prophecy. 
The  methods  in  which  prophecies  were  given  :  (i)  By  dis- 
tinct utterances  ;  (2)  By  means  of  institutions  in  their  nature 
temporary  ;  (3)  By  prophetic  types  ;  (4)  By  educational  pre- 
cepts ;  (5)  By  history  foreshadowing  the  future  ;  (6)  By  typi- 
cal characters.  The  way  in  which  the  prophecies  are 
regarded  in  the  New  Testament.  Quotations  ' '  by  way  of 
accommodation  "  set  aside  and  each  of  the  above  classes 
considered.  The  Old  Testament  as  a  whole  considered  as 
prophetic  in  the  New. 

LECTURE  IX.      Typology.      I.    History  and    General 
Principles 195 

Distinction  between  type  and  allegory.     Treatment  in  the 


via  CONTENTS. 

PAGE 

early  Eastern  and  Western  Church.  Reaction  at  the  Ref- 
ormation. The  Cocceian  school.  Opposition  to  this. 
School  of  Marsh.  Examination  of  Marsh's  principle.  Def- 
inition of  type  :  in  the  New  Testament  ;  in  theological  liter- 
ature. Canons  for  the  determination  of  true  types.  Dis- 
cussion of  these.  There  may  be  several  types  of  one  antitype, 
and  several  antitypes  of  one  type. 

LECTURE  X.  Typology.  II.  Special  Classes  of  Types.  220 
I.  Ritual  or  legal  types  ;  examples,  the  sin  offering  ;  the 
priesthood.  2.  Historical  types.  Reasons  for  expecting 
them.  Proofs  of  their  existence.  Illustrations.  Apparent 
defects  in  these  types.  Their  importance.  Indications  of 
their  typical  character  in  the  Old  Testament.  Combination 
of  historical  and  prophetical  types.  3.  Prophetical  types,  of 
three  forms  :  {a)  types  in  the  past  or  present  are  foretold  as 
to  appear  again  in  the  future  ;  {b)  a  type  not  expressly,  but 
in  its  essential  piinciple  is  embodied  in  prophecy  ;  {c)  the 
type  itself  is  future  and  is  foretold. 

LECTURE  XL  Typology  III.  Principles  and  Direc- 
tions FOR  THE  INTERPRETATION  OF  PARTICULAR  TyPES  .  .  .  247 
Only  principles  can  be  laid  down  to  be  applied  with  judgment. 
I.  Nothing  sinful  in  the  Old  Testament  can  be  a  type  of 
the  good  things  of  the  Gospel.  2.  The  meaning  of  types  is 
to  be  determined  partly  by  the  light  thrown  back  by  the  Gos- 
pel ;  shown  («)  by  the  nature  of  types,  {b)  from  the  analogy 
of  prophecy,  (<r)  from  the  history  of  Israel,  {a)  from  the  use 
of  the  word  **  mystery"  in  the  New  Testament,  {e)  from 
the  analogy  of  God's  works.  3.  A  type  must  ho. preparatory . 
4.  A  type  has  only  one  main  idea.  Explanation  and  modi- 
fication of  this  rule.  5.  Regard  must  be  had  to  the  essential 
difference  between  type  and  antitype.     Summary. 

LECTURE  XII.     The  alleged  "  Double  Sense  "  of  Scrip- 
ture.   262 

Definition.  Grounds  for  asserting  the  existence  of  a  "  Dou- 
ble sense."  Examination  of  these.  Objections  to  the  exist- 
ence of  such  a  sense.     Quotations  by  "accommodation." 


CONTENTS.  ix 

PAGE 

LECTURE    XIII.     The  New    Testament    testimony  to 

THE  AUTHORSHIP  OF  THE   OlD    TESTAMENT   BOOKS . 274 

Different  views  on  the  subject.  Examination  of  the  facts. 
Elimination  of  irrelevant  matter.  Examination  of  Jude  14, 
15  ;  of  several  quotations;  Ps.  ex.  i,  xvi.  7-10.  Enumera- 
tion of  Books  quoted  by  name.  Examination  of  Acts,  iii.  24 ; 
of  Matt.  ii.  17,  18;  of  Mark,  i.  2,  3.  Result  thus  far.  Pas- 
sages in  which  quotations  are  made  by  name.    Conclusions. 

LECTURE  XIV.  The  New  Testament  use  of  the  Old..  310 
General  features  of  anonymous  quotations.  The  way  in 
which  the  Old  Testament  was  regarded  by  New  Testament 
writers.  Quotations  (i)  for  purposes  of  argument,  with 
illustrations;  (2)  expressing  general  truth  belonging  to  all 
ages  ;  (3)  as  illustrations  ;  (4)  use  of  sacred  and  familiar 
words  simply  to  express  the  thought  of  the  writer.  Other 
uses  of  the  Old  Testament  in  the  New. 

LECTURE  XV.     Conclusion... 332 

The  relations  examined  indicate  One  Being  as  the  Author 
of  all  Revelation.  They  show  the  eternal  verity  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  the  finalty  of  the  New.  Bearing  of  "  the 
progress  of  Revelation  "  upon  its  order.  Character  of  this 
progress.  The  Divine  love  in  adapting  Revelation  to  the 
needs  and  capacities  of  man. 

INDEX   OF   SCRIPTURE   TEXTS 343 


THE 

OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS 

IN   THEIR 

MUTUAL    RELATIONS. 


LECTURE   I. 

THEIR   ESSENTIAL   UNITY. 

The  two  parts  of  the  sacred  volume  which  pass 
under  the  general  name  of  the  Bible  are  commonly 
known  as  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  They  are 
more  accurately  called  the  Old  and  New  Covenants. 
The  former  derives  its  name  especially  from  the  Cove- 
nant made  in  the  Sinaitic  legislation,  but  includes  the 
record  of  the  earlier  revelations  and  of  the  lives  of 
the  patriarchs,  as  well  as  the  subsequent  history  of 
the  chosen  people  and  the  prophetic  teachings  given 
them ;  the  latter  contains  all  that  has  been  authen- 
tically preserved  of  the  life  and  teachings  of  our 
Lord  and  of  His  immediate  followers.  Whatever 
differences  of  opinion  may  exist  in  connection  with 
this  book,  it  is  yet  recognized  by  all  who  profess  the 
name  of  Christ  as  in  some  sense  coming  from  God, 
and  as  having  been  actually  written  down  by  men. 


2  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

It  has,  therefore,  both  a  Divine  and  human  side,  and 
both  of  these  aspects  must  be  recognized  in  any  in- 
telligent treatment  of  its  contents. 

The  two  parts  of  this  Book  are  widely  separated 
from  one  another  by  the  languages  in  which  they 
were  originally  written,  by  the  times  in  which  they 
were  published,  by  the  condition  and  development 
of  the  people  to  whom  they  were  first  given,  and  by 
the  general  character  of  the  revelations  they  pro- 
claim. Each  of  the  single  books,  indeed,  composing 
these  parts,  is  also,  in  several  of  these  respects,  dis- 
tinguished from  every  other;  but  there  is  a  still 
broader  line  of  distinction  between  the  two  collec- 
tions. In  as  far  as  these  differences  can  be  at  once 
recognized  as  arising  from  the  circumstances  of  the 
times  and  the  condition  of  the  people,  they  call  for  no 
remark.  Every  intelligent  person  can  see  that  such 
differences  were  both  necessary  in  themselves,  and 
were  required  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  purposes 
of  Revelation.  But  there  are  other  differences  which, 
although  they  are  fully  explained  to  the  thoughtful 
mind  by  the  consideration  of  these  facts,  yet  to  a  more 
superficial  observation  have  often  seemed  to  involve  a 
certain  antagonism  between  the  two  Dispensations. 
This  apparent  opposition  is  increased  by  the  contin- 
ued rejection  of  the  New  Covenant,  even  to  the  pres- 
ent day,  by  the  mass  of  the  people  to  whom  the  Old 
was  given ;  by  the  misunderstanding  of  some  passages 
of  the  New  Testament  which  speak  directly  of  the 
Old  ;  and  by  the  contrasted  teaching  of  the  two  on 
a  variety  of  subjects,  such  as  revenge,  polygamy  and 
slavery,  and,  above  all,  by  their  general  teaching  in 


THEIR  ESSENTIAL    UNITY.  3 

regard  to  the  means  whereby  man  may  obtain  ac- 
ceptance with  God. 

But  before  these  points  are  examined,  it  must  be 
shown  that,  notwithstanding  these  or  any  other  marks 
of  unlikeness,  there  is  really  an  essential  unity  under- 
lying both  Testaments  so  strong  and  clear  as  to 
prove  them  to  be  parts  of  one  great  work.  I  do 
not  know  how  this  enquiry  can  be  entered  upon 
more  satisfactorily  than  by  observing  how  the  Old 
Testament  was  regarded  by  those  whose  office  it 
was  to  promulgate  the  New. 

First  among  these  utterances  must  stand  the  an- 
gelic declarations  which  ushered  the  Gospel  into  the 
world,  and  the  teachings  of  the  Author  of  the  New 
Covenant.  The  very  birth  of  His  forerunner  was 
heralded  as  God's  beginning  "  to  perform  the 
mercies  promised  to  our  fathers "  and  ''  the  oath 
which  He  swore  to  our  father  Abraham.""^  His 
dwn  birth  was  announced  as  that  of  one  who  should 
sit  "  upon  the  throne  of  His  father  David,"  and 
should  "  reign  over  the  house  of  Jacob  forever."  f 
He  conformed  His  life  to  the  requirements  of  the 
law  and  everywhere  represented  Himself  as  the 
Messiah  foretold  of  old,  and  as  ''  not  come  to  de- 
stroy the  law  or  the  prophets,  but  to  fulfil,"  :j:  add- 
ing with  solemn  asseveration,  '^  One  jot  or  one  tittle 
shall  in  nowise  pass  from  the  law  till  all  be  ful- 
filled." §  He  summarized  the  law  in  its  two  great 
commandments  as  embodying  His  own  teaching  of 
the  duty  of  man.||     He  rested  His  own  new  treat- 

*  Luke,  i.  72,  73.  f  lb.  32,  33.  %  Matt.  v.  17. 

%Ib.  18;  Luke,  xvi.  17.      ||  Matt.  xxii.  37-40  ;  Mark,  xii  29-31. 


4  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

ment  of  the  law  of  marriage  upon  the  record  of  its 
original  institution  in  the  narrative  of  Genesis." 
He  justified  His  deahng  with  the  Sabbath  by  ex- 
amples taken  from  the  sacred  history  of  old.f  He 
read  passages  from  the  Prophets  in  the  Synagogue 
and  declared  that  they  were  fulfilled  in  Himself.  % 
He  argued  with  and  convicted  His  enemies  from 
the  Scriptures,  §  which  He  says  "cannot  be 
broken."  ||  He  reproved  His  disciples  for  being 
**  slow  of  heart  to  believe  all  that  the  Prophets  have 
spoken  of "  Him,  and  "  beginning  at  Moses  and  all 
the  Prophets,  He  expounded  unto  them  in  all  the 
Scriptures  the  things  concerning  Himself."  ^  But 
not  to  multiply  proofs  of  so  obvious  a  fact,  it  may  be 
said  broadly  that  He  rested  His  whole  life  and 
teaching  upon  the  Old  Covenant,  declaring  Himself 
to  be  the  Redeemer  to  whom  that  Covenant  had 
looked  forward  from  the  first,  the  culmination  of  all 
its  hopes  and  promises,  and  always  represented  His 
teaching  as  the  more  perfect  setting  forth  of  the  will 
of  the  same  God  who  had  spoken  by  the  Prophets 
of  old.  For  all  this  there  is  and  can  be  but  one  ex- 
planation :  it  is  inconceivable  that  the  Author  of  the 
New  Covenant  could  have  taken  this  position  unless 
He  believed  in  the  essential  unity  of  the  two  Dis- 
pensations, and  looked  upon  Himself  as  the  point 
where  they  met  and  coalesced. 

The  teaching  of  His  immediate  followers  is  always 


*  Matt.  xix.  4-6  ;  Mark,  x.  6-9. 

f  Matt.  xii.  3-5;  Mark,  ii.  25,  26  ;  Luke,  vi.  3,  4. 

X  Luke,  iv.  16-21.  §  E.  g.  Matt.  xxii.  15-46,  etc. 

I  John,  X.  35  ;  cf.  Matt.  v.  19.      ^  Luke,  xxiv.  26,  27. 


THEIR  ESSENTIAL    UNITY.  5 

the  same.  Throughout  the  Book  of  Acts  they  are 
seen  everywhere  planting  themselves  upon  the  old 
Scriptures,  whether  in  their  private  assemblies 
claiming  the  promises  and  prophecies  given  to  their 
fathers,*  or  in  their  addresses  to  the  unconverted, 
"  reasoning  with  them  out  of  the  Scriptures  ....  that 
Christ  must  needs  have  suffered  »  c  »  .  and  that  this 
Jesus  is  Christ."  f  So  also  their  converts  "  mightily 
convinced  the  Jews  .  o  .  »  showing  by  the  Scriptures 
that  Jesus  was  Christ."  %  Particular  instances  are 
too  familiar  to  need  mention.  Passing  on,  there- 
fore, to  the  Epistles,  one  of  the  longer  of  them,  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  is  wholly  taken  up  with  a 
masterly  argument  showing  from  the  declarations  of 
the  Old  Testament  itself  the  superiority  of  Christ 
and  of  His  Dispensation.  It  is  addressed  to  men  of 
Israelitish  descent  who  clung  with  tenacity  to  the 
sacred  oracles  delivered  to  their  fathers,  and  it  rec- 
ognizes in  almost  every  line  that  these  and  the 
teachings  of  the  Gospel  are  parts  of  one  vast  Revela- 
tion, coming  from  the  same  Source,  given  for  the 
same  object,  and  both  perfectly  true  and  authorita- 
tive, but  that  the  older  was  in  its  form  temporary 
and  made  provision  for  its  own  completion  in  the 
new.  The  key-note  of  the  whole  epistle  is  given  in 
its  opening  sentence,  "  God,  who  at  sundry  times 
and  in  divers  manners  spake  in  tinges  past  unto  the 
fathers  by  the  Prophets,  hath  in  these  last  days 
spoken  unto  us  by  His  Son."  § 

*  Acts,  i.  i6,  20  ;  iv.  25,  26,  etc. 

f  Acts,  xvii.  2,  3;  cf.  ii.  30-36  ;  iii.  18  ;  ix.  11 ;  xxvi.  6,  22,  23,  etc. 

X  Acts,  xviii.  28.  §  Heb.  i.  i. 


6  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

This  epistle  was  written  under  peculiar  circum- 
stances, and  addressed  to  a  people  trained  under 
the  old  Dispensation.  It  has  been  argued,  by  those 
who  would  do  away  with  its  evidence  of  the  unity 
of  the  two  Dispensations,  that  the  epistle  does  not 
represent  the  relations  really  existing  between  them, 
but  is  a  case  of  special  pleading.  A  careful  exami- 
nation of  the  epistle  must  dispel  such  a  view.  The 
difficulty  in  the  mind  of  the  Jew  was  that  the  Mo- 
saic legislation  should  in  any  wise  be  superseded. 
He  looked  for  its  enlargement  and  completion,  but 
was  shocked  at  the  idea  of  its  sustaining  to  the 
Gospel  such  a  subordinate  position  as  is  here  insist- 
ed upon.  But  however  this  may  be,  the  argument 
of  the  epistle  stands  upon  its  own  merits  ;  and  what- 
ever may  have  been  its  object,  it  does  conclusively 
prove  the  unity  of  the  two  Dispensations. 

Several  of  the  other  epistles  were  written  to 
churches  chiefly  of  Gentile  origin.  In  most  of  them 
there  were  probably  also  converts  of  Jewish  descent ; 
but  the  Gentile  element  so  preponderated  that  they 
are  addressed  collectively  as  Gentiles.  Thus  the 
Ephesians  are  bidden  to  "  remember  that  ye  being 
in  times  past  Gentiles  in  the  flesh ;  "  *  the  Corin- 
thians are  told  "  ye  know  that  ye  were  Gentiles  ;  "  f 
and  the  whole  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  characterizes 
them  as  convertsirom  heathenism,  now  in  danger  of 
being  subverted  by  Judaizing  teachers.  Other  epistles 
might  also  be  enumerated,  but  these  will  suffice.  One 
cannot  fail  in  reading  these  epistles  to  be  struck  with 
the  fact  that  wherever  Christianity  was  received 
*  Eph  ii.  II.  1 1  Cor.  xii.  2. 


THEIR  ESSENTIAL    UNITY,  J 

among  the  Gentiles  the  Old  Testament  was  likewise 
received,  as  a  matter  of  course.  The  Apostle  ad- 
dresses his  Gentile  converts  as  familiar  with  its 
contents ;  he  argues  from  its  laws,  its  histories 
and  its  prophecies,  as  from  things  acknowledged  to 
be  sacred  and  authoritative  by  his  readers.  In  the 
few  epistles  named  above  there  are  considerably 
more  than  a  hundred  quotations  from,  or  allusions 
to  the  Old  Testament.  Many  of  these  are  distinct 
citations,  used  argumentatively.  Neither  this  uni- 
versal reception,  nor  this  use  of  the  Old  Testament 
as  of  absolute  authority  in  Christian  argument  could 
have  been  possible,  except  on  the  ground  of  the 
unity  of  the  two  revelations.  In  the  Epistle 
to  the  Galatians  St.  Paul  is  very  definite  in  speak- 
ing of  the  relations  between  them.  He  says 
that  God  "  preached  before  the  Gospel  unto  Abra- 
ham ; "  "^  that  the  law  "  was  added  because  of 
transgressions,  till  the  seed  should  come  to  whom 
the  promise  was  made  ;  "  f  and  that  "  the  law  was 
our  schoolmaster  to  bring  us  unto  Christ."  %  The 
first  promulgators  of  Christianity,  therefore,  the 
men  who  had  been  immediately  instructed  by  the 
Author  of  Christianity  Himself,  looked  upon  the 
law  and  taught  their  hearers  to  look  upon  it  as  a 
preparatory  system,  designed  to  lead  men  to  the 
Gospel,  and  therefore  in  full  harmony  with  its  pur- 
pose and  design. 

Such   unity  is  a  necessary  result  of  the  common 
object  of  the  two  Dispensations.     In  both  man  is 
regarded  as  a  fallen  being,  capable  of  restoration  to 
*  Gal.  iii.  8.  \  lb.  19.  %  lb.  24. 


8  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

his  lost  communion  with  God  ;  and  each  revelation 
was  divinely  given  to  show  him  how  he  might  attain 
this  desired  end.  This  will  be  again  spoken  of  more 
fully.  But  meantime,  when  these  revelations  are 
examined,  each  by  itself,  it  were  folly  to  refuse  to 
recognize  that  great  differences  are  apparent.  Par- 
ticular precepts  of  the  old  are  distinctly  set  aside  in 
the  new  and  others,  of  far  greater  moral  purity  and 
strictness,  are  substituted.  **  Ye  have  heard  that  it 
hath  been  said  by  them  of  old  ....  but  I  say  unto 
you  "  "^  becomes  the  key-note  of  much  of  our  Lord's 
teaching.  Of  more  weight  even  than  this  is  the  fact 
emphasized  and  insisted  upon,  especially  by  St.  Paul, 
that  the  general  tone  of  the  law  as  understood  in  his 
day  was,  "  The  man  that  doeth  these  things  shall  live 
by  them,"t  putting  man's  salvation  on  the  ground  of 
perfect  obedience  to  the  divine  requirements  ;  while 
the  teaching  of  the  Gospel  is  distinctly  that  such  obe- 
dience is  impossible  to  fallen  man,  and  that  his  only 
hope  of  salvation  is  through  faith  in  Him  whose 
obedience  alone  was  perfect,  and  who  by  His  death 
upon  the  cross  has  made  atonement  for  human  sin. 
To  appreciate  the  reasons  for  these  differences 
and  their  consistency  with  the  essential  unity  already 
described,  it  is  necessary  to  take  a  general  view  of 
the  history  of  the  people  of  God  and  of  their  moral 
condition  at  various  stages  in  their  life.  Such  an 
examination  may  well  begin  by  considering  the 
anthropomorphic  representations  of  the  Deity  in 
the  Old  Testament,  which  have  been  the  occasion 
for  so  much  cavil  and  criticism. 

*  Matt.  V.  21,  27,  33,  etc.  f  Rom.  x.  5  ;  Gal.  iii.  12. 


THEIR  ESSENTIAL    UNITY.  9 

It  is  to  be  noted  at  the  outset  that  this  whole 
question  of  the  use  of  anthropomorphic  language  and 
descriptions  is  only  one  of  degree.  Human  concep- 
tions of  that  which  is  above  us  can  only  be  formed 
from  the  conceptions  of  things  around  us,  with  a 
gradual  elimination  of  all  that  is  unworthy.  Even 
now  there  is  no  philosophical  language  the  roots  of 
which  may  not  be  traced  to  sensible  things,  and  there 
are  no  abstract  terms  which  have  not  grown  up  from 
an  original  reference  to  sensible  images.  Perhaps  in 
all  language  there  is  no  higher  description  of  the  In- 
finite Being,  no  more  fitting  statement  of  his  absolute 
supremacy  and  incomprehensibility  than  that  in 
the  epistle  of  the  great  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  : — ■ 
"  Who  is  the  blessed  and  only  Potentate,  the  King 
of  kings,  and  Lord  of  lords,  Who  only  hath  immor- 
tality, dwelling  in  the  light  which  no  man  can  ap- 
proach unto ;  Whom  no  man  hath  seen  or  can 
see."  "^  Yet  all  the  words  here  used  to  express  the 
most  elevated  idea  which  the  human  mind  can  form 
are  taken  from  human  relations  and  sensible  actions. 
When  the  human  race  started  on  its  career,  it  had 
not  yet  devised  secondary  and  abstract  meanings 
for  its  terms,  because  it  had  not  yet  developed 
ideas  calling  for  the  use  of  such  abstractions.  It 
could  only  be  addressed,  as  children  and  the  uned- 
ucated must  be  now,  by  concrete  language  and  sen- 
sible images ;  and  if  God,  in  His  lovingkindness, 
would  reveal  Himself  to  man  at  all,  it  could  only  be 
in  terms  adapted  to  his  comprehension.  Any  other 
language  must  have  failed  of  its  purpose.  Think  of 
*  I  Tim.  vi.  15,  16. 


10  THE   OLD  AND   NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

the  absurdity  of  talking  to  Adam  or  even  to 
Abraham  in  modern  philosophic  terms  of  "  the  Un- 
knowable," of  "  a  Power  not  ourselves  which  makes 
for  righteousness,"  of  ''  a  Power  beyond  nature 
forever  inscrutable  to  the  human  intellect,"  and  the 
like.  To  the  simple  minds  in  the  early  childhood  of 
our  race,  the  idea  of  a  Superior  Being  could  only 
be  given  as  something  higher  than  the  highest  thing 
they  knew;  He  must  be  spoken  of  substantially  as 
a  man  and  yet  above  man.  Yet  that  no  false  im- 
pression might  be  conveyed  by  such  unavoidable 
use  of  language,  the  Scriptures  are  careful  to  place 
here  and  there  statements,  perhaps  not^ully  under- 
stood at  the  time,  but  yet  making  it  clear  that  the 
Divine  Being  in  His  own  nature  was  something  in- 
finitely more  and  higher  than  it  was  possible  to  ex- 
press. Far  back  in  the  original  Sinaitic  legislation, 
Moses  is  told  at  the  very  moment  when  he  is  vouch- 
safed a  manifestation  of  the  Divine  Presence,  "  Thou 
canst  not  see  my  face :  for  there  shall  no  man  see 
me  and  live."  *  The  earliest  of  the  prophets,  using 
almost  the  words  of  the  Divinely  inspired  Seer  of 
Aram,  f  declares  that  *'  the  strength  of  Israel  "  "  is 
not  a  man  that  He  should  repent."  %  The  book  of 
Job, — whatever  be  its  actual  date — certainly  the 
most  ancient  Scripture  in  which  anything  of  a  philo- 
sophic tone  is  to  be  found,  has  many  explicit 
passages :  "  Canst  thou  by  searching  find  out 
God?  Canst  thou  find  out  the  Almighty  unto 
perfection  ?  It  is  as  high  as  heaven — what  canst 
thou    do  ?     Deeper    than    hell — what    canst    thou 

*  Ex.  xxxiii,  20.         f  Num.  xxiii.  19.         \  i  Sam.  xv.  29 


THEIR  ESSENTIAL    UNITY.  II 

know  ?  "  *  Such  teaching  is  scattered  here  and  there 
throughout  all  the  sacred  books,  and  must  have 
shown  man  that  the  language  in  which  he  was 
obliged  to  speak  of  God  and  in  which  (in  conde- 
scension to  his  weakness)  God  also  spoke  to  him, 
was  inadequate,  and  that  he  had — as  we  very  fully 
understand  that  we  have  now — no  words  in  which 
he  could  speak  truly  and  sufficiently  of  the  Infinite 
Being.  In  his  own  nature  and  essence  the  finite  can 
never  know  Him  except  in  so  far  as  He  is  revealed 
to  us  through  the  Mediator,  the  God-man,  partaker 
of  both  natures,  and  thus  the  one  who  brings  together 
the  incommensurable  terms  of  the  finite  and  Infinite. 
But  not  only  is  this  true  of  the  bare  mention  of  the 
being  and  attributes  of  the  Supreme  ;  the  same  thing 
must  hold  good  also  of  the  account  given  of  His 
acts.  When  the  Bible  speaks  of  "  the  Lord  God 
walking  in  the  garden  in  the  cool  of  the  day  "  and  call- 
ing to  Adam  "where  art  thou?"f  the  critic  of  our 
age  sniffs  at  the  narrative  as  fit  only  for  children. 
Precisely;  and  further,  only  such  narrative  was  adapt- 
ed to  the  spiritual  children  who  were  the  progenitors 
of  our  race.  Probably  few  people  of  ordinary  intel- 
ligence, unless  determined  to  find  fault,  really  have 
any  great  difficulty  with  such  simple  narratives,  when 
they  remember  that  only  by  means  of  this  simplicity 
and  anthropomorphic  imagery  could  any  idea  be  con- 
veyed to  the  minds  of  men  in  those  early  ages.  But 
the  case  is  different  when  expressions  are  reached 
which  seem  to  involve  really  untrue  statements,  when, 
e,g.  it  is  said  that  "  God  repented,"   that  His  "  wrath 

*  Job,  xi.  7,  8.  f  Gen.iii.  8,  9. 


12-  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

burned  like  fire,"  that  He  loved  one  and  hated  an- 
other. It  is  apt  to  be  forgotten  how  difficult  it  is  to 
express  the  ideas  intended  to  be  conveyed  by  these 
terms  without  resort  both  to  long  paraphrases  and 
to  abstract  expressions  quite  unintelligible  to  sim- 
ple minds.  Even  in  matters  of  physical  science, 
when  the  utmost  accuracy  of  language  is  expected, 
who  objects  to  the  statement  that  heat  acts  different- 
ly on  different  substances,  expanding  the  iron  and 
contracting  the  clay,  or,  as  in  the  famous  illustration 
of  St.  Augustine,  burning  up  the  chaff  and  purifying 
the  gold  P"^  We  know  that  the  so-called  natural 
laws  are  uniform  in  their  operation  (although  this 
conception  of  them  has  been  reached  only  by  long 
study  and  reflection),  and  we  are  now  taught  that 
heat  is  only  "■  a  mode  of  motion."  Its  different  effects 
are  simply  the  result  of  differences  in  the  objects 
acted  upon.  Nevertheless,  we  are  often  compelled 
in  popular  language  to  describe  differences  of  effects 
in  terms  which  seem  to  imply  difference  in  the  action 
of  the  force  itself.  The  light  leads  to  very  varied 
results  as  it  falls  upon  the  surface  of  the  thermo- 
pile, upon  the  sensitive  plate  in  the  camera,  upon  the 
polarising  crystal,  or  upon  the  refracting  prism.  The 
energy  is  the  same  in  all  these  cases ;  but  we  speak 
popularly  as  if  the  light  itself  acted  differently  when 
such  diverse  results  follow  from  its  uniform  action 
upon  different  objects.  In  spiritual  things  we  are  still 
less  emancipated  from  a  corresponding  necessity. 
We  cannot  more  conveniently  speak  of  God's  relation 
to  His  faithful  servants  than  by  describing  Him  as 
*  In  Psal.  xxi.  5  ;  De  Civ.  Dei.  I.  c.  8. 


THEIR  ESSENTIAL    UNITY.  1 3 

their  Father.  We  know  that  this  is  a  figurative  term  ; 
but  we  have  no  more  satisfactory  way  of  conveying 
the  idea  intended.  We  recognize  fully  that  any  change 
in  the  manifestation  of  the  Divine  action  upon  man 
depends  upon  a  change  in  the  persons  acted  upon ; 
but  we  cannot  better  describe  this  than  by  saying 
that  He  changes  whom  we  know  to  be  unchangeable. 
In  this  last  case  the  difficulty  lies  not  merely  in  the 
language,  but  in  the  thought  conveyed  by  it.  It  is 
hard  for  other  than  thoughtful  minds  to  understand 
how  precisely  the  same  grace  which  softens  and 
blesses  one  heart,  hardens  and  consequently  curses 
another.  When  occasionally  this  is  plainly  stated 
in  Scripture,  as  when  the  Apostles  speak  of  their 
preaching  as  "  the  savor  of  death  unto  death  "  "  in 
them  that  perish  "  equally  as  "the  savor  of  life  unto 
life  **  "  in  them  that  are  saved,"  *  much  explanation 
is  required  by  many  minds  before  such  passages  can 
be  understood.  The  same  thing  is  true  when  God 
is  said  to  have  hardened  Pharaoh's  heart,  f  or  to 
have  sent  a  lying  spirit  into  Ahab's  prophets.  :j: 

Revelation  having  been  given  for  men  of  all  ages 
and  all  lands,  must  be  adapted,  on  the  whole,  to  the 
understanding  of  all.  There  must  be  statements 
which  shall  enable  the  cultured  and  thoughtful  to 
explain  what  may  seem  strange  in  those  adapted 
especially  to  more  simple  minds ;  but  the  great  bulk 
of  its  teachings  must  be  suited  to  the  needs  of  the 
mass  of  mankind.  It  would  be  as  hard  to  banish 
from  it  terms  describing  the   Divine  acts  by  their 

*  2  Cor.  ii.  15,  16.  f  Ex.  viii.  13  ;  ix.  12  ;  x.  20. 

\  I  Kings,  xxii.  19-23. 


14  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

sensible  phenomena  as  it  would  be  to  banish  from 
ordinary  life  the  expressions  "  the  sun  rises  "  and 
''  the  sun  sets."  Even  the  most  cultured  and  philo- 
sophic at  the  present  day,  as  already  said,  cannot 
avoid  using  something  of  anthropomorphic  language 
in  speaking  of  the  Deity  and  His  acts,  and  it  is  plain 
that  the  same  thing  must  have  been  tenfold  more 
necessary  to  men  in  the  dim  twilight  of  knowledge. 
Our  race,  before  it  had  been  developed  by  reflection 
and  science,  needed  to  be  taught  spiritual  truths  in 
the  same  forms  which  we  now  use  for  our  children ; 
only  those  forms,  being  the  clothing  of  Divine  truth, 
remain  still,  not  merely  the  delight  of  childhood, 
but  the  perpetual  instructor  of  those  who  are  able, 
by  their  spiritual  maturity,  to  see  beneath  the  forms 
the  substance  they  were  intended  to  convey. 

Yet  there  is  a  manifest  progress  in  this  respect  in 
the  Scriptures — a  progress  so  marked  as  to  be  num- 
bered among  the  characteristic  differences  between 
the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  Our  heavenly  Father 
has  always  revealed  Himself  quite  up  to,  and  even 
somewhat  beyond  man's  capacity  at  the  time  ;  not 
so  much  beyond  as  to  be  unintelligible  and  prevent 
any  good  effect,  but  yet  enough  to  raise  man  con- 
tinually to  a  higher  level  as  fast  as  his  capacity 
would  allow.  It  is  to  be  expected,  therefore,  that 
as  man  has  been  improved  and  elevated  by  the 
earlier  revelations,  the  later  will  become  increasingly 
spiritual  in  their  character,  and  the  grosser  forms  of 
anthropomorphism  will  be  more  and  more  left  be- 
hind. Yet  the  earlier  forms  were  not  only  once 
necessary  in  the  childhood  of  our  race  ;  but  they  are 


THEIR  ESSENTIAL    UNITY.  1 5 

Still  required  both  for  the  actual  child  and  for  all 
that  vast  mass  of  mankind  who  remain  permanently 
in  a  childlike  stage  of  intellectual  development^^ 

This  particular  point  has  been  dwelt  upon  at  con- 
siderable length  because  it  furnishes  the  key  to  the 
other  differences  between  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments which  may  now  be  spoken  of  more  briefly. 
For  it  is  quite  as  true  of  the  substance  as  of  the 
form  of  revelation,  that  in  order  to  be  of  any  use 
and  value  to  man  it  must  be  adapted  to  his  capacity. 
The  sermon  on  the  Mount  would  have  been  spoken 
quite  in  vain  to  the  horde  of  slaves  escaping  from 
Egypt,  or  to  the  marshalled  hosts  of  Joshua's  army  ; 
and  the  glowing  exhortations  of  St.  Paul's  epistles 
could  not  have  moved  the  hearts  of  those  who  knew 
nothing  of  Gethsemane  and  Calvary.  "  If  the  fact 
be  that  God  is  what  in  the  imperfection  of  our  lan- 
guage we  are  fain  to  describe  as  merciful  and  loving, 
it  follows  that  in  any  revelation  He  will  not  reveal 
Himself  perfectly,  but  only  partially,  as  man  is  able 
to  bear  it ;  and  this  must  be,  in  a  certain  sense,  un- 
truly or  erroneously  (for  whatever  is  imperfect  is 
from  one  point  of  view  erroneous).  Revelation 
must,  therefore,  be  marked  in  different  ages  by  dif- 
ferent degrees  of  this  imperfection  or  so-called 
erroneousness  of  teaching.  Men  must  be  trained 
through  inferior  conceptions — such  conceptions  as 
it  was  possible  to  awaken  in  them  without  violating 
the  laws  of  their  nature — to  enable  them  to  rise  to 
higher;  they  must  be  appealed  to  through  motives 
and  feelings  they  can  understand,  before  they  can 
be  led   up  to  those  which  at  first   they  could   not 


1 6  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

understand."  *  They  must  be  taught  simple  and 
fundamental  truth  before  they  can  be  trusted  with 
that  which  is  less  obvious  and  which  rests  upon  the 
former  as  its  foundation. 

If,  now,  particular  instances  of  the  divergence  of 
teaching  between  the  two  dispensations  be  consid- 
ered, they  will  all  be  found  to  come  under  this 
general  principle  or  under  one  or  two  others  imme- 
diately connected  with  and  dependent  upon  it.  The 
difficulty  from  the  recognition  of  easy  divorce  and 
of  polygamy  is  not  wholly  removed  by  our  Lord's 
argument  from  the  history  of  creation,  that  monog- 
amy was  originally  the  Divine  purpose,  and  that 
polygamy  was  only  temporarily  suffered  for  the 
hardness  of  men's  hearts.f  We  may  understand 
that  a  law  of  higher  morality  was  originally  pro- 
posed, and  that  when  men  evidently  were  unequal 
to  its  requirements  God  should  simply  not  have 
enforced  the  law,  should  have  forborne  to  punish 
men  for  its  violation — that,  as  St.  Paul  says  of  His 
dealing  with  heathen  polytheism  and  idolatry,  "  The 
times  of  ignorance,  therefore,  God  overlooked;":]: 
but  the  difficulty  here  is  that  polygamy  was  not 
merely  suffered,  but  expressly  sanctioned  by  law;  it 
was  not  only  allowed,  but  it  was  recognized  in  posi- 
tive enactments.  Here  two  things  are  to  be  noted 
which  have  a  much  wider  application  than  to  this 
particular  case.  In  the  first  place,  in  any  system  of 
legislation    many  things   not   really  approved,  but 

*  See  an  article,  "  Errors  of  the  Scriptures,"  in  the  Bibliotheca 
Sacra  for  July,  1879,  p.  510. 

\  Matt.  xix.  8.  X  Acts,  xvii.  30  (Revision). 


THEIR   ESSENTIAL    UNITY.  IJ 

simply  tolerated,  must  necessarily  be  recognized  in 
the  provisions  of  the  laws.  Thus  if  polygamy  was 
to  be  tolerated,  it  must  be  guarded  against  abuses 
common  among  the  surrounding  heathen,  and  in 
order  to  this  its  existence  must  be  recognized  in 
the  law.  Yet  this  does  not  show  that  it  was  in 
accordance  with  the  Divine  will  in  any  other  sense 
than  that  it  was  suffered  for  the  time  being.  Sec- 
ondly, the  distinction  between  toleration  and  com- 
mand is  not  always  quite  so  clear  as  it  may  seem  at 
first  sight.  In  regard  to  all  those  matters  which  are 
steps  in  education  and  in  progress  towards  a  higher 
state  it  may  often  be  necessary  to  make  positive 
enactments  for  the  time  being,  although  these  are 
in  themselves  temporary  and  destined  to  be  super- 
seded or  reversed  in  the  future.  It  is  the  universal 
experience  in  a  new  country  that  laws  are  required 
in  an  unformed  condition  of  society  which  must 
pass  away  as  that  society  becomes  more  settled. 
The  vast  mass  of  the  best  system  of  jurisprudence  in 
an  old  and  cultured  nation  would  be  altogether  out 
of  place  among  pioneers  in  the  wilderness  ;  and  cor- 
respondingly, the  simple  and  summary  rules  so  abso- 
lutely necessary  in  the  one  case  would  be  tyrannical 
in  the  extreme  and  work  the  utmost  injustice  in  the 
other.  So  it  was  also  in  the  case  of  what  may  be 
called  the  spiritual  pioneers  of  mankind.  It  was 
necessary  that  positive  laws  should  be  given  to  them 
which  they  were  destined,  by  means  of  the  very 
education  they  thus  attained,  to  outgrow,  and  which, 
at  a  period  of  higher  spiritual  advancement,  were  to 
be  superseded  or  even  reversed.  In  the  case  of  po- 
2 


1 8  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

lygamy  there  is  no  occasion  for  such  reversal ;  those 
laws  which  recognize  it  were  simply  made  to  prevent 
its  worst  abuses  in  view  of  the  necessity  of  its  tem- 
porary toleration. 

The  laws  of  revenge  partly  come  under  this 
head.  In  part,  it  is  true,  they  have  precisely  the 
same  character  as  those  of  polygamy.  They  were 
steps  in  a  progress,  restraining  the  people  from  the 
unlimited  license  of  revenge  and  leading  them 
through  the  principle  of  exact  justice  to  the  Gospel 
requirements  of  "love  your  enemies,"  "do  good  to 
them  that  hate  you;"  the  law  itself  meantime  em- 
bodying the  precept  "  thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor 
as  thyself,"  ^  that  such  as  were  able  to  receive  it 
might  understand  the  will  of  God  and  be  prepared  for 
the  higher  and  fuller  revelation.  But  the  lex  talionis 
of  the  Pentateuch  unquestionably  went  beyond 
this.  It  was  not  merely  permissive,  but  obligatory: 
"Thine  eye  shall  not  pity;  but  life  shall  go  for 
life,  eye  for  eye,  tooth  for  tooth,  hand  for  hand,  foot 
for  foot."  t  In  the  sermon  on  the  Mount  this  very 
passage  is  quoted  under  the  formula,  "Ye  have 
heard  that  it  hath  been  said,"  and  it  is  added,  "but 
I  say  unto  you,  that  ye  resist  not  evil :  but  who- 
soever shall  smite  thee  on  thy  right  cheek,  turn  to 
him  the  other  also."  %  How  are  these  contradictory 
precepts  to  be  considered  as  the  harmonious  require- 
ments of  the  same  Being?  In  virtue  of  the  principle 
just  explained  ;  because  the  condition  of  the  people 
was  such  that  they  must  first  be  trained  under  a 
lower,  in  order  to  become  fitted  for  a  higher  standard. 

*  Lev.  xix.  i8.  \  Deut.  xix.  21.  %  Matt.  v.  38,  39. 


THEIR  ESSENTIAL    UNITY,  1 9 

They  must  be  taught  the  principles  of  justice  to  pre- 
pare them  to  receive  those  of  love.  The  same  order 
of  Divine  action  which  is  thus  required  in  spiritual 
things  is  familiar  in  regard  to  the  Divine  works  in 
the  natural  world.  "  The  monsters  of  the  carbonif- 
erous era  must  precede  the  development  of  life  in  the 
tertiary,  and  that  in  turn  must  prepare  the  way  for 
the  age  of  man  ;  yet  to  Him  w^ho  ordered  the  earth 
from  the  beginning  those  carboniferous  monsters 
were  good  in  their  day  (although  their  existence 
now  would  be  incompatible  with  the  life  of  to-day), 
and  on  looking  back  we  see  no  unfitness  in  their  for- 
mation under  the  guiding  hand  of  Him  who  was 
leading  our  earth  to  a  higher  state.  So  in  the  spirit- 
ual development  of  our  race,  as  far  as  we  can  judge, 
it  was  necessary  that  God  should  govern  man  accord- 
ing to  his  capacities,  and  give  him  laws  suited  to  his 
condition.  Only  thus  could  he  be  advanced  to  a 
higher  standard ;  only  by  impressing  on  a  lawless 
people,  given  to  unbridled  license  of  revenge,  a 
sense  of  exact  justice  and  of  the  rights  of  others 
could  they  be  prepared  for  a  higher  teaching."  "^ 

Slavery  comes  under  the  same  head  as  polygamy. 
It  was  suffered  for  the  time  "  for  the  hardness  of  their 
hearts,"  but  it  was  hedged  about  and  restrained  in 
a  variety  of  ways,  transforming  the  institution  into 
one  essentially  different  from  that  of  the  contem- 
porary nations,  and  giving  principles  which  would 
finally  result  in  its  abolition.     Yet  even  Christianity 


*See  Art.  in  Bibl.  Sacra  ubi  sup.  p.  523.    See  also  Mozley,  Ruling 
Ideas  in  Early  Ages,  and  Newman  Smythe,  Old  Faiths  in  New  Light. 


20  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

could  not  proceed  at  once  to  its  entire  abrogation, 
and  only  after  eighteen  centuries  of  the  gradual  leav- 
ening influence  of  Christian  principles  has  it  been 
abolished  even  among  civilized  and  Christian  nations. 
The  punishment  of  the  innocent  family  for  the 
sins  of  its  guilty  head,  and  the  extermination  of 
whole  nations,  and  that  too  in  bloody  wars,  by  the 
hands  of  the  chosen  people,  strike  strangely  upon 
the  Christian's  ear,  and  sometimes  lead  him  to 
doubt  if  the  dispensation  in  which  they  were  per- 
emptorily commanded  could  have  come  from  the 
Author  of  the  Gospel  of  peace  and  love.  The 
study  of  these  facts  opens  another  of  those  broad 
principles  of  the  Divine  dealings  with  man,  and  the 
last  that  will  here  need  to  be  considered.  Men  always 
have  stood,  and  they  still  stand,  in  a  two-fold  rela- 
tion to  God,  individual  and  federal ;  as  single  per- 
sons responsible  for  their  own  works  and  treat- 
ed accordingly,  and  as  members  of  a  body  acting 
together  and  dealt  with  collectively.  This  is  seen 
everywhere  in  God's  natural  government  of  the 
world.  Children  inherit  not  merely  the  social  posi- 
tion and  the  fortunes,  but  the  physical  and  mental 
peculiarities  of  their  parents  ;  families  prosper  or 
are  ruined  according  to  the  conduct  of  their  head ; 
whole  nations  are  affected  by  the  action  of  their 
rulers.  Whether  or  not  we  can  explain  why  the 
world  should  have  been  so  constituted,  it  is  plain 
that  we  must  expect,  if  both  come  from  the  same 
Author,  the  same  general  features  in  revelation  as  in 
the  constitution  of  nature.  The  existence  of  this 
two-fold  relation  in  our  own  day  may  be  illustrat- 


THEIR  ESSENTIAL    UNITY.  21 

ed  by  the  Christian  Church  ;  whatever  grace  or 
blessing  comes  by  its  instrumentality  is  in  conse- 
quence of  the  federal  relation  in  which  each  be- 
liever stands  to  his  Master,  over  and  above  his 
individual  relation.  Certainly  the  latter  is  the  all- 
important  and  determinative  relation  ;  for  "  every 
man  shall  be  judged  according  as  his  work  shall  be." 
Yet  while  man  remains  by  his  constitution  a  social 
being,  the  social  relation  can  never  be  ignored,  nor 
has  it  ever  been  in  the  Divine  dealings  with  man. 
A  great  change,  however,  has  gradually  come  about 
as  the  ages  have  rolled  on.  To  the  student  of  the 
history  of  revelation  its  progress  is  marked  in 
nothing  more  strongly  than  in  the  constantly  grow- 
ing importance  of  the  individual  in  comparison  with 
the  federal  relation.  In  early  times  the  latter  was 
far  more  prominent.  So  strong  was  it  in  the  time 
of  Moses  that  the  prophet  could  declare,  God  "  hath 
not  beheld  iniquity  in  Jacob,  neither  hath  he  seen 
perverseness  in  Israel,"*  at  the  very  time  when  He 
was  punishing,  tens  of  thousands  of  them  for  their 
gross  and  outrageous  sins.  In  early  days  men — 
whether  Israelites  or  heathen — looked  upon  the  na- 
tion chiefly  as  an  organic  whole  and  upon  the  family 
as  a  possession  of  its  head.  When,  therefore,  such 
nations  as  the  Amalekites  or  the  Canaanites  arrayed 
themselves  against  the  Church  of  God  they  must  be 
dealt  with  as  a  whole,  in  order  that  the  Divine  judg- 
ment should  be  intelligible  or  have  any  value  in  the 
minds  of  either  friends  or  foes.  Occasionally  there 
occurred,  it  is  true,  such  a  striking  instance  of  faith 

*  Num.  xxiii.  21. 


22  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS, 

that  Rahab  could  be  spared  in  the  destruction  of 
the  doomed  city,  but  even  so  her  whole  family 
must  be  spared  with  her.  Generally,  however,  men 
made  little  distinction  between  the  individual  and 
the  body  to  which  he  belonged.  The  same  thing  is 
true  also  of  the  treatment  of  families ;  the  Israelites 
could  not  have  understood  that  God  was  seriously 
displeased  with  Dathan  and  Abiram,  or  afterwards 
with  Achan,  had  not  their  whole  families  been  in- 
volved in  the  sentence  upon  their  heads.  If  the 
Divine  judgments  were  to  be  of  any  effect  in  show- 
ing God's  government  of  the  world,  they  must  be 
sweeping  and  comprehensive.  This  is  still  to  some 
degree  unavoidable  ;  but  it  was  far  more  so  in  the 
olden  time,  when  the  value  of  human  life  was  so 
little  understood.  The  only  way  in  which  the 
Divine  detestation  of  the  sins  of  the  Canaanites 
could  be  conveyed  to  their  minds  was  by  the  com- 
mand that  the  whole  people,  like  Sodom  and  Go- 
morrah, should  be  utterly  swept  away.  The  result 
showed  the  necessity  of  this  command  ;  for  when 
the  people  failed  in  its  execution,  they  also  failed 
to  understand  the  helnousness  of  Canaanitish  sin. 
Their  Ideas  could  only  slowly  and  gradually  be  raised 
above  those  of  the  rest  of  the  world.  Yet  it  is  never 
to  be  forgotten  that  all  those  judgments  in  which 
the  innocent  were  involved  with  the  guilty,  were 
temporal  and  not  eternal  in  their  character,  they 
were  like  the  earthquake  which  now  destroys  the 
city,  or  the  catastrophe  into  which  :the  ship's  com- 
pany is  plunged  by  the  unskilfulness  or  error  of  the 
captain.     The  wife  of  Korah,  who  went  down  alive 


THEIR  ESSENTIAL   UNITY.  23 

into  the  pit,"*  may  yet  have  been  received  into 
Paradise ;  and  many  of  the  Ninevites,  who  heard 
"  the  preaching  of  Jonah,"  although  their  city  was 
sparedjf  may  have  received  the  final  doom  of  the 
impenitent. 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  ask  why  the  .  chosen 
people  should  have  been  made  the  instruments  of 
these  judgments,  or  why,  in  some  instances,  appeal 
should  have  been  made  to  lower  motives  to  nerve 
them  for  their  task.  The  lesson  of  God's  ano^er 
against  Canaanitish  sin  could  in  no  other  way  have 
been  so  impressed  upon  the  Israelites  as  by  making 
them  the  actual  executioners  of  His  wrath.  Even 
thus  their  tendency  to  heathen  abominations  was  so 
strong  as  to  have  been  but  imperfectly  held  in  check 
by  this  most  vivid  personal  impression.  In  regard 
to  the  appeal  sometimes  made  to  such  reasons  as 
hereditary  hostility  to  the  people  of  God,  former  in- 
jurious treatment  and  the  like,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
Amalekites,  :f  it  may  suffice  to  say  that  man  is  of  a 
mixed  nature,  and  in  mercy  to  our  weakness  God 
has  always  appealed,  in  seeking  to  lead  us  to  the 
right,  not  only  to  the  motives  of  love  and  duty  and 
gratitude,  but  also  to  self-interest.  Such  appeals 
are  a  help,  are  even  essential  to  us  now,  in  the  full 
sunlight  of  the  Gospel ;  how  much  more  to  those  in 
their  spiritual  infancy  in  the  dim  twilight  of  the 
law. 

There  are  no  other  particular  instances  of  alleged 
opposition  between  the  details  of  the  Old  and  the 

*  Num.  xvi.  32,  33.  f  Jonah,  iii. 

X  I  Sam.  XV.  2,  etc.;  Deut.  xxv.  17-19. 


24  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

New  Covenants  which  will  not,  upon  reflection,  be 
seen  to  fall  under  the  principles  which  have  now 
been  discussed.  It  only  remains  that  a  word  should 
be  said  upon  the  general  scheme  of  salvation  as  set 
forth  in  them  respectively. 

It  is  abundantly  clear  that  man,  having  once  be- 
come alienated  from  God,  and  being  an  inheritor  of 
a  sinful  nature,  could  never  restore  himself  by  his 
own  exertions  to  that  state  of  perfect  holiness  in 
which  alone  communion  with  an  all-holy  God  is  pos- 
sible. However  his  history  may  be  looked  upon  as 
on  the  whole  an  upward  progress,  yet  the  energy  by 
which  that  progress  has  been  made  has  always  been 
from  without  and  from  above,  and  this  energy  it  has 
been  the  office  of  all  revelation  to  place  within  his 
reach.  In  other  words,  the  old  and  the  new  revela- 
tion must  necessarily  have  had  the  same  common 
purpose  of  raising  man  from  sin  to  a  life  of  holiness, 
and  thereby  of  communion  with  God.  Before  any 
step  could  be  taken  on  this  road,  the  sin  already 
committed  must  be  done  away.  Hence,  after  his 
fall,  man  resorted  to  sacrifice  as  a  means  of  ap- 
proach to  God.  How  far  he  appreciated  the  imper- 
fection of  this  means  we  do  not  know  ;  but  it  is 
plain  to  every  thoughtful  man  that  it  was  intrin- 
sically insufficient.  There  is  an  inherent  want  of 
correlation  between  human  sins  and  the  life  of  the 
lower  animals  ;  and  hence,  as  the  author  of  the  Epis- 
tle to  the  Hebrews  has  taught,  ''  it  is  not  possible 
that  the  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats  should  take 
away  sins."  *  Sacrifice,  therefore,  could  only  have  ex- 
*  Heb.  X.  4. 


THEIR  ESSENTIAL    UNITY.  2$ 

pressed  on  man's  part  his  repentance  and  desire  to 
be  forgiven,  and  in  so  far  as  it  was  understood  to  be 
a  Divine  institution,  some  symbolic  form  of  atone- 
ment. When  sacrifices  came  to  be  systematically 
ordered  under  the  Mosaic  law,  their  typical  char- 
acter was  abundantly  shown  in  many  ways.  The 
heathen  idea  of  the  sacrifice  as  an  adequate  com- 
pensation to  God  for  the  offence,  as  a  gznd  pro  quo, 
was  absolutely  excluded.  It  was  plain  that  there 
must  be  some  other  ground  of  acceptance  with  God, 
and  this  ground  was  expressly  declared  to  Abraham 
in  words  which  the  New  Testament  has  again  and 
again  referred  to  as  containing  the  cardinal  prin- 
ciple of  the  Gospel :  Abraham  "  believed  God  and 
it  was  counted  unto  him  for  righteousness.""^  The 
true  principle  of  salvation,  perfect  trust  in  God,  was 
the  same  under  both  dispensations  and  binds  them 
together  in  a  perpetual  unity.  Nor  can  this  unity 
be  broken  because,  long  centuries  after  the  promise 
to  Abraham,  it  became  necessary  for  a  time  to  con- 
trol the  wickedness  and  perversity  of  the  people  by 
a  law  of  definite  and  detailed  precepts  lest  they 
should  relapse  into  utter  ungodliness  and  heathen- 
ism. St.  Paul  justly  argues,  *'The  covenant  that 
was  confirmed  before  of  God  in  Christ,  the  law, 
which  was  four  hundred  and  thirty  years  after,  can- 
not disannul,"  and  the  law  '*  was  added  because  of 
transgressions  till  the  Seed  should  come  to  whom 
the  promise  was  made."  f  When  this  was  accom- 
plished, the  law  had  served  its  purpose,  and,  like 

*  Gen.  XV.  6,  cf.  Rom.  iv.  3;  Gal.  iii.  6  ;  James,  ii.  23. 
f  Gal.  iii.  17-19. 


26  THE  OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

everything  else  which  has  fulfilled  its  end,  could  only 
be  a  hinderance  and  obstruction  if  it  continued  to  be 
maintained.  The  Apostle  does  not  hesitate  to  call 
it  then  a  "  handwriting  of  ordinances  that  was 
against  us,  which  was  contrary  to  us,"  and  which 
Christ  "  took  out  of  the  way,  nailing  it  to  His 
cross  ;  "  *  but  until  then  it  was  important,  and  the 
precepts  of  the  law,  as  will  appear  further  on,  were 
thoroughly  educational  in  their  character,  so  that  in 
its  least  as  well  as  in  its  greatest  points  it  "  was  our 
schoolmaster  to  bring  us  to  Christ."  f  Its  aim  was 
to  teach  the  necessity  of  holiness,  and  therefore  of 
the  forgiveness  of  sin,  and  that  the  ground  of  these 
things  must  be  trust  in  God  and  submission  to  His 
will. 

There  are  innumerable  points  which  cannot  now 
be  touched  upon,  showing  the  thorough  unity  of  the 
two  covenants.  Some  of  these,  such  as  the  prophe- 
cies of  the  Old  Testament,  and  the  quotations  m.ade 
from  it  in  the  New,  will  be  discussed  in  the  follow- 
ing lectures.  For  the  present  these  points  must 
suffice:  The  Author  of  the  New  Covenant  presents 
Himself  to  mankind  as  the  Redeemer  promised 
under  the  Old,  and  declares  that  its  purpose  from 
the  beginning  was  fulfilled  in  His  work  and  teach- 
ings. His  disciples,  one  and  all,  took  the  same  po- 
sition, and  from  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment they  mightily  convinced  the  Jews  that  Jesus 
was  the  Christ.  These  Scriptures  were  carried 
everywhere  among  the  Gentile  converts  as  sacred 
and   authoritative.      The    same   fundamental   prin- 

*  Col.  ii.  14,  15.  f  Gal.  iii.  24. 


THEIR  ESSENTIAL    UNITY,  2/ 

ciples  characterize  both  covenants,  and  the  differ- 
ences between  them  all  result  from  the  application 
of  these  principles  to  different  people  at  different 
times  and  under  different  conditions.  And,  finally, 
both  have  one  common  purpose:  the  restoration  of 
fallen  man  to  communion  with  an  all-holy  God,  and 
that,  too,  by  the  very  same  means,  of  trust  in  Him 
and  acceptance  of  His  appointed  way  of  salvation. 


LECTURE  11. 

THE  PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER  OF   REVELATION. 

In  the  last  lecture  it  was  assumed  that  Revelation 
had  been  progressive,  and  several  explanations  were 
based  upon  this  fact.  The  fact  itself  needs  to  be 
more  fully  emphasized  and  illustrated  ;  for  without 
its  constant  recognition  there  can  be  no  sufficient 
understanding  of  the  Divine  word.  This  lecture 
will  be  the  expansion  of  the  text,  "  God  who  .... 
spake  in  times  past  unto  the  fathers  by  the  proph- 
ets, hath  in  these  last  days  spoken  unto  us  by  His 
Son."* 

There  is  a  certain  difficulty  in  the  treatment  of 
this  subject.  If  revelation  has  been  progressive  and 
adapted  to  man's  increasing  capacity  to  receive  it, 
then  it  may  plausibly  be  argued  that  this  correlation 
marks  the  sacred  books  as  the  mere  outgrowth  of 
man's  advancing  knowledge  rather  than  as  the  Divine 
condescension  to  human  needs.  In  other  words,  it 
shows  them  to  be  of  human  rather  than  of  Divine 
origin.  This  position  has  been  vigorously  asserted 
in  recent  years,  and  has  obtained  no  inconsiderable 
share  of  the  public  attention.  It  has  a  certain 
plausibility  at  first  view,  but  on  more  careful  exam- 
ination it  will  be  found  inconsistent  with  the  facts, 

*  Heb.  i.  I. 


PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER   OF  REVELATION.     29 
« 

as  will  be  seen  presently.  Let  us  first  look  at  the 
actual  progressive  character  of  revelation,  since  this 
lies  at  the  basis  of  all  just  estimate  of  the  relations 
and  proportions  of  its  different  parts. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  plain  on  a  priori  grounds 
that  any  revelation,  like  every  other  form  of  educa- 
tion, in  order  to  useful  effect,  must  be  given  gradually. 
This  may  best  be  done  by  a  series  of  revelations  given 
in  portions,  and  these  must  necessarily  be  progres- 
sive. Otherwise,  if  the  later  made  no  advance  upon 
the  earlier,  there  would  be  no  reason  why  it  should 
be  given  ;  if  all  that  was  meant  to  be  taught  of  the 
Divine  will  was  announced  in  the  first,  there  would 
be  nothing  for  the  second  to  tell.  Again :  if  the 
earlier  revelations  had  any  effect,  if  they  did  not  ut- 
terly fail  of  their  purpose,  man  must  have  been  ad- 
vanced by  them  in  spiritual  knowledge  and  thus 
fitted  for  further  revelation.  Historically,  it  is  plain 
that  this  was  actually  the  case,  and  that  with  each 
successive   revelation   man   did   attain  to   a   hicrher 

o 

knowledge  of  divine  things,  to  better  ideas  of  his 
own  duty  and  purer  conceptions  of  the  Deity.  Still 
this  does  not  imply  the  necessity  of  a  continuous 
flow  of  successively  fuller  revelations ;  if  each  reve- 
lation were  somewhat  above  man's  capacity  at  the 
period  when  it  was  given,  time  must  be  allowed  for 
him  to  grow  up  to  it  before  another  could  be  re- 
quired. Four  centuries  intervened  between  Malachi 
and  Christ.  Eighteen  centuries  have  not  yet  suf- 
ficed to  bring  men  up  to  the  full  standard  of  the 
Christian  revelation,  although  the  growth  through 
successive  ages  has  been  real  and  marked.     So,  also, 


30  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

a  higher  revelation  having  been  given  in  outline 
which  the  mass  of  the  people  were  as  yet  unprepared 
to  receive,  it  may  be  followed  by  one  inferior  in 
that  the  higher  outlines  of  the  earlier  are  overlaid 
by  teachings  better  adapted  to  the  capacities  of  the 
people,  in  order  to  lead  them  up  gradually  to  that 
which  has  already  been  announced.  Such  St.  Paul 
shows  to  have  been  the  relation  of  the  Mosaic  legis- 
lation to  the  Abrahamic  promise.  The  people  had 
proved  themselves  unable  to  receive  that  which  had 
been  given.  They  must  now  be  trained  up  from  the 
level  on  which  they  stood.  Nevertheless,  on  the 
whole,  revelation  is  recognized  by  all  as  having  been 
progressive. 

Any  examination  of  the  character  of  the  Divine 
revelations  to  man  must  be  limited  to  those  of  which 
the  record  has  been  preserved.  There  may  have 
been  others  given,  especially  in  the  earliest  times, 
and  the  Mosaic  record,  itself  a  compilation  of 
earlier  documents,  implies  them.  The  Babylonian 
tablets,  far  outdating  the  age  of  Abraham,*  seem  to 
have  preserved  the  trace  of  some  primeval  revela- 
tions overlaid  by  masses  of  myth  and  fable,  the  ac- 
cretions of  ages  of  human  transmission.  But  it  is 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  most  important  have 
been  preserved  in  the  records  which  remain  to  us, 
and  therefore  that  the  knowledge  divinely  given  at 
any  time  did  not  essentially  surpass  that  which  may 
be  obtained  from  the  existing  Scriptures  relating  to 
that  time. 

*  See  Smith's  Chaldean  Genesis  ;  and  the  volumes  of  Records  of  the 
Past. 


PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER   OF  REVELATION.     3 1 

The  order  of  the  several  parts  of  the  Bible,  es- 
pecially the  older  revelation,  is  by  no  means  uni- 
versally agreed  upon.  Of  late  years  earnest  discus- 
sion has  arisen  in  regard  to  the  date  of  considerable 
parts  of  both  Testaments.  This  may  be  considered 
as  now  practically  settled  for  the  New  Testament,  at 
least  in  its  main  points,  in  favor  of  what  is  known 
as  the  traditional  view  ;  but  in  regard  to  the  Old, 
we  are  still  in  the  midst  of  the  controversy.  Details 
of  the  disputed  points,  such  as  the  date  of  many  of 
the  Psalms,  or  of  the  latter  part  of  Isaiah,  or  of  the 
book  of  Daniel,  important  as  they  are  in  other  con- 
nections, do  not  matter  for  our  present  purpose  ; 
but  in  treating  of  the  progress  of  revelation,  we 
must  have  before  our  minds  some  idea  of  the  general 
order  in  which  its  main  parts  have  been  given.  We 
must  assume  that  the  Levitical  legislation  either 
preceded  or  followed  the  prophetical  teaching. 
Unfortunately,  this  forms  now  one  of  the  chief 
points  of  critical  discussion,  and  it  is  impossible  here 
to  consider  the  facts  on  which  the  question  must 
ultimately  be  decided.  It  is  necessary,  therefore,  to 
adopt  as  "  a  working  hypothesis  "  that  view  which 
will  best  explain  the  phenomena  before  us.  The 
newer  criticism  rests  largely  on  what  is  supposed  to 
be  the  orderly  evolution  of  the  several  parts  of  the 
sacred  word ;  but  if  it  be  once  admitted  that  there 
is  progress  in  revelation,  that  progress  must  surely 
be,  in  accordance  with  all  the  analogies  of  God's 
works,  from  the  lower  to  the  higher.  Such  a  prog- 
ress, as  will  presently  appear,  involves  the  accept- 
ance of  the  traditional  view.     It  will  therefore  be 


32  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

here  assumed  that  broadly,  and  as  regards  their  re- 
lation to  one  another,  the  several  parts  of  revelation 
are  connected  chronologically  as  has  generally  been 
supposed  until, the  times  of  the  most  recent  criti- 
cism. While  this  is  assumed  here  only  as  a  work- 
ing hypothesis,  it  is  believed  that  it  will  be  sustained 
by  the  most  thorough  and  searching  examination  of 
the  facts. 

The  mention  of  the  birth  of  Abraham  occurs  in 
the  eleventh  chapter  of  Genesis.  If  any  one  will 
open  his  Bible  at  this  point,  and  imagine  for  a  mo- 
ment that  he  has  no  other  revelation  than  is  con- 
tained in  the  previous  record,  he  will  see  at  once  how 
very  small  a  proportion  of  the  whole  bulk  of  the 
sacred  volume  precedes  this  event.  In  the  vast 
period  of  earlier  time,  of  which  we  have  no 'certain 
chronology,  the  revelations  recorded  are  few  and  of 
the  utmost  simplicity ;  but  man  is  represented  as  in 
a  shocking  state  of  ungodliness,  and  with  a  strong 
tendency  to  evil.  Such  divine  communications  as 
were  given  were  chiefly  practical,  relating  to  im- 
mediate and  easily  understood  duties  ;  yet  there  is 
a  certain  progress  even  in  these,  from  the  single 
childlike  command  laid  on  our  first  parents  to  the 
"  covenant  "  established  with  Noah  having  the  bow 
in  the  clouds  as  its  token.  With  Abraham  a  new 
era  was  ushered  in  ;  a  special  family  was  singled 
out  and  prepared  for  the  reception  of  a  fuller  reve- 
lation. The  primeval  promise  had  been  given  long 
ages  before,  but  without  details  or  explanation ; 
now  its  fulfilment  was  limited  to  the  patriarch's 
family:  *'in  thy  seed  shall  all  the   families  of  the 


PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER   OF  REVELATION.     33 

earth  be  blessed."  Abraham  himself  was  vouch- 
safed many  divine  visions;  God's  dealings  with 
mankind  in  various  ways  were  made  known  to  him  ; 
the  course  of  the  Divine  training  for  his  posterity 
during  centuries  to  come  was  declared  ;  and,  above 
all,  he  was  taught  the  great  principle  of  faith  as  the 
means  of  acceptance  with  God,  which,  obscured  in 
after  ages,  was  finally  brought  into  full  light  by  the 
Gospel ;  and  the  fundamental  fact  of  all  true  religion, 
the  unity  of  God,  altogether  lost  from  sight,  or 
only  here  and  there  maintained  by  the  more  in- 
telligent minds  among  the  nations  of  the  earth,  was 
most  strongly  impressed  upon  him  and  his  descend- 
ants. It  is  particularly  to  be  noted  that  up  to  this 
time,  the  revelation  of  God  presented  Him  to 
human  thought  as  the  one  universal  God  of  all  the 
earth,  technically  expressed,  as  Elohiui ;  the  revela- 
tion of  Him  in  a  peculiar  relation  to  Israel,  as  Jahve^ 
was  not  until  later.  He  was  not,  however,  even  then 
revealed  as  a  merely  national  Deity,  but  as  the  uni- 
versal God  in  a  special  relation  to  His  chosen  peo- 
ple. Much  clearer  views  of  the  character  of  God 
and  of  His  dealings  with  man  come  out  gradually 
in  the  lives  of  Abraham's  immediate  descendants. 
Still,  if  you  were  asked  to  cut  off  your  Bibles  at  the 
close  of  Genesis  and  see  how  much  of  Divine  knowl- 
edge you  could  obtain  from  that  single  book,  you 
would,  until  you  had  thought  upon  it,  be  surprised 
to  see  how  small  and  meagre  and  elementary  was 
your  information.  If  even  this  be  compared  with 
the  legends  of  other  nations  covering  the  same 
period — with  such  a  book,  e.  g.y  as  ''  the  Chaldean 
3 


34  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

Genesis,"  its  vast  superiority  is  manifest.  The 
Chaldeans  were  a  far  more  civiHzed  and  powerful 
nation  than  the  Israelites  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus. 
Yet  either  they  had  sunk  from  the  level  of  primeval 
knowledge  and  purity,  or  else — what  for  our  pur- 
pose is  practically  the  same  thing — the  Hebrews  had 
been  elevated  by  revelation.  The  same  thing  is 
true  of  the  Egyptians,  the  most  powerful  and  the 
most  advanced  of  all  the  nations  of  the  period. 
Their  priesthood  still  preserved  the  idea  of  the 
unity  of  God  as  an  esoteric  doctrine,  and  they  held 
firmly  to  a  future  life  whose  awards  depended  upon 
the  conduct  of  men  here  below  ;  but  the  mass  of  the 
people  were  allowed  to  sink  into  the  grossest  poly- 
theism and  idolatry,  and  neither  priests  nor  people 
appear  to  have  had  the  slightest  conception  of  the 
value  of  faith  as  the  means  of  acceptance  with  God. 
Passing  from  the  narratives  of  Genesis  to  the  next 
book  of  the  Bible,  we  find  that  Israel  has  become  a 
nation  and  a  fresh  chapter  in  the  plan  of  redemp- 
tion is  unrolled.  In  the  long  struggle  of  Pharaoh 
against  God,  and  the  terrible  judgments  by  which 
his  pride  was  humbled,  in  the  divine  interpositions 
for  the  deliverance  of  the  chosen  people,  and  the 
miraculous  support  of  their  vast  hosts  in  the  wilder- 
ness, they  were  taught  by  personal  experience  that 
"  man  doth  not  live  by  bread  alone  but  by  every 
word  that  proceedeth  out  of  the  mouth  of  God."  "^ 
But  when  at  last  they  had  encamped  at  the  foot  of 
Sinai  and  were  to  receive  instructions  in  the  will 
of  God  which   should   make   them  "  a  kingdom  of 

*  Deut.  viii.  3;  Matt.  iv.  4. 


PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER   OF  REVELATION.     35 

priests,  and  an  holy  nation,"'^  they  proved  unfit 
for  their  high  vocation.  They  begged  that  they 
might  no  longer  hear  the  voice  of  God  directly,  but 
that  Moses  should  announce  His  will  to  them ;  f 
they  turned  aside  again  to  their  idolatries,  and  wor- 
shipped the  golden  calf.J  "  Because  of  transgres- 
sions" it  became  necessary  that  *' a  law  should  be 
added, §  by  which  their  gross  and  carnal  propensi- 
ties might  be  held  in  check  until  they  were  further 
trained  and  prepared.  Even  this  law  was  very  im- 
perfectly observed  in  the  centuries  that  followed, 
until  by  long  and  severe  discipline,  by  rejection  of 
masses  of  the  people,  and  by  stern  judgments  on 
the  remnant,  they  were  at  last  brought  to  a  better 
mind.  Nevertheless,  a  real  progress  was  made  ;  and 
this  law,  in  itself  in  some  respects  a  backward  step, 
was  still  at  the  time  and  in  view  of  the  condition 
and  needs  of  the  people,  a  vast  and  real  advance. 
By  it  a  church  was  established,  with  its  sacraments, 
its  typical  sacrifices  and  worship,  its  hierarchy,  and 
its  government  of  the  life  of  man  by  definite  out- 
ward law.  The  duty  of  a  loving  obedience  to  God 
from  the  heart  and  of  scrupulous  regard  to  the 
rights  of  a  neighbor  is  everywhere  insisted  upon, 
and  the  subordination  of  the  passions  and  immedi- 
ate selfish  interests  to  a  higher  will  is  most  emphati- 
cally taught.  Above  all,  the  unity  and  sole  su- 
premacy of  God  and  the  abomination  of  rendering 
homage  to  any  other,  is  set  forth  with  a  distinctness 
that  he  may  read  who  runs. 

*  Ex.  xix.  6.  f  lb.  XX.  19,  20. 

X  lb.  xxxii.  §  Gal.  iii.  19. 


36  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

It  is  to  be  remembered  in  connection  with  these 
facts  that  Abraham  was  an  exceptional  man,  whose 
spiritual  character  and  discernment  were  far  above 
those  of  either  his  contemporaries  or  of  most  of  his 
descendants ;  while  Israel  at  Sinai  was  a  mass  of  av- 
erage people.  Higher  truth  could  be  understood  by 
him  than  by  them.  Yet  among  them  also  were  such 
better  men  as  Moses  and  Joshua,  and  in  the  midst 
of  the  lower  teaching  for  the  mass,  higher  teaching 
was  given  for  the  spiritual  nurture  of  such  as  could 
receive  it. 

It  were  too  long  to  follow  out  thus  in  detail  the 
successive  revelations.  They  were  given  little  by 
little,  with  great  intervals  between,  as  during  the 
troubled  and  disorderly  period  of  the  Judges;  or  at 
other  times  in  the  fuller  outbursts  of  inspired  song 
and  prophetic  teaching,  as  when  David  had  restored 
the  independence  of  the  nation  and  established  the 
worship  of  God  in  a  more  regular  and  systematic 
way;  or  the  great  development  of  prophecy  at  other 
and  later  epochs,  as  at  the  time  of  the  approaching 
captivity  of  the  Northern  kingdom  in  the  days  of 
Isaiah  and  his  contemporaries,  Hosea,  Amos,  and 
Micah  ;  or  again  just  before  and  during  the  Baby- 
lonian captivity,  when  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  Dan- 
iel prophesied.  One  has  only  to  read  the  various 
books  in  their  ordinarily  accepted  chronological  or- 
der to  be  struck  with  the  steady  progress  of  revela- 
tion, with  the  ever  increasing  knowledge  of  God  and 
of  man's  duty  brought  out  in  the  successive  books, 
each  fresh  revelation  pre-supposing  all  that  had 
gone  before,  and  therefore  adding  its  own  teaching 


PROGRESSIVE  CHARACTER   OF  REVELATION.     2>7 

without  repeating  what  was  already  known.  There 
are  two  points  to  which  attention  may  be  especially 
called  :  the  teaching  of  the  spiritual  meaning  of  the 
law;  and  the  definite  preparation  by  prophecy  for 
the  still  higher  revelation  yet  to  be  made.  On  each 
of  these  a  few  words  will  suffice. 

In  regard  to  the  former :  the  closing  exhortations 
of  Moses  expressly  and  repeatedly  set  forth  the  lov- 
ing obedience  of  the  heart  as  the  essential  point  in 
the  fulfilling  of  the  law.  Yet  these  exhortations 
were  little  regarded  by  the  people,  who  signally 
failed  even  in  the  observance  of  the  outward  com- 
mands. Further  instruction  was  needed,  and  accord- 
ingly the  constant  teaching  of  the  prophets,  as  well 
as  the  sacred  songs  of  the  Psalms,  insist  on  spiritual 
service  as  alone  acceptable,  and  describe  in  vivid 
terms  the  worthlessness  of  mere  outward  worship 
apart  from  that  of  the  heart.  All  this  had  indeed 
been  taught  before ;  but  the  progress  of  revelation 
was  marked  by  bringing  this  teaching  into  promi- 
nence and  awakening  the  consciousness  of  the  peo- 
ple to  the  true  meaning  and  value  of  the  revelation 
already  given.  As  Christ  "  brought  life  and  immor- 
tality to  light,"  "^  though  they  were  known  before ; 
and  as  it  could  be  said  before  our  Lord's  ascension, 
"  the  Holy  Ghost  was  not  yet,"t  although  holy  men 
all  along  had  been  filled  with  His  influence,:}:  and  all 
the  prophets  had  spoken  under  His  inspiration  :§ 
so  it  was  that  the  Psalms  and  the  Prophets  were 
practically  a  new  revelation  of  the  spirituality  of  the 

*  2  Tim.  i.  lO.  f  John,  vii.  39.  X  Luke,  i.  41,  67. 

§  2  Tim.  iii.  16  ;  i  Pet.  i.  11 ;  2  Pet.  i.  21. 


38  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

law,  although  the  same  truth  had  existed,  little  no- 
ticed, in  the  law  itself.  On  this  account  it  has 
sometimes  seemed,  to  superficial  critics,  that  there 
is  an  opposition  between  the  law  and  these  subse- 
quent writings ;  but  it  is  plain  on  any  just  consid- 
eration of  the  people  and  their  needs  that  this  is  not 
the  case.  The  spiritual  element  had  been  all  along 
in  the  law,  only  more  dimly  expressed,  and  obscured 
by  the  necessity  of  restraining  and  guiding  a  rude 
and  lawless  people  by  a  multitude  of  definite  out- 
ward precepts.  The  Israelites,  with  that  perverse 
tendency  which  has  always  existed  in  the  human 
heart,  were  bent  on  overlooking  the  spiritual  element 
and  relying  on  the  mere  outward  performance  of 
the  letter  of  the  law.  It  was  one  of  the  chief  ofifices 
of  subsequent  revelation  to  show  clearly,  and  by 
admonitions  repeated  from  age  to  age,  that  the  res- 
toration of  sinful  man  to  communion  with  God  was 
too  great  and  real  a  change  to  be  accomplished  by 
any  outward  acts  alone.  There  was  no  other  oppo- 
sition than  that  which  must  always  exist  between 
more  partial  and  more  perfect  truth. 

But  all  this  would  have  been  incomplete  and  in- 
sufificient  without  the  other  teaching.  The  later 
revelations,  by  giving  higher  ideas  of  God  and  of 
man's  duty,  showed  the  people  the  imperfection  of 
the  system  under  which  they  were  living,  and  that 
what  they  really  needed  and  the  better  spirits  among 
them  longed  for,  "  the  law  could  not  do,  in  that  it 
was  weak  through  the  flesh."  "*  It  was,  therefore, 
necessary  that  the  Psalms  and  the  Prophets  should 
*  Rom.  viii,  3, 


PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER   OF  REVELATION.     39 

point  forward  to  the  Redeemer  to  come  with  a  clear- 
ness and  fulness  not  yet  expressed  either  in  the 
patriarchal  revelations  or  in  the  Sinaitic  legislation. 
He  had  been  foretold  in  Paradise,  He  had  been 
promised  to  Abraham,  He  had  been  prophesied  of 
by  Moses ;  but  here,  as  before,  it  was  the  office  of 
later  revelation  to  make  this  promise  more  prominent 
and  more  full.  All  through  the  ages  of  Israel's  history 
inspired  men  were  raised  up  for  this  purpose,  and 
their  work  was  so  thoroughly  done  that  the  Messiah's 
coming  became  the  constant  thought  and  the  life- 
spring  of  every  devout  believer.  By  this  means  the 
greatest  advance  of  all  was  made  and  the  best  prepa- 
ration effected  for  the  new  and  higher  dispensation. 
Brought  by  the  law  to  a  sense  of  sin,  having  only 
means  intrinsically  insufficient  for  its  forgiveness, 
they  were  thus  taught  to  look  forward  to  the  ''  foun- 
tain opened  ....  for  sin."  *  There  is,  therefore,  in 
these  successive  revelations  an  order  and  logical 
development  in  accordance  with  the  needs  and  the 
capacities  of  men.  Let  us  review  this  order :  First, 
after  man's  fall  comes  the  fundamental  but  somewhat 
indefinite  promise  of  the  Redeemer;  then  a  gradual 
schooling  in  the  nature  of  God  and  of  man's  relations 
to  Him,  culminating  in  the  announcement  of  the 
great  principle  of  faith  and  the  choice  of  a  peculiar 
people  to  be  the  depositaries  of  the  knowledge  of 
God  and  examples  of  faithful  obedience  to  His  will. 
Proving  unequal  to  this  high  vocation,  the  law  was 
given  them  to  be  their  "  schoolmaster  to  bring  them 
to  Christ."     Meantime,  instruction  in  the  spiritual 

*  Zech.  xiii.  i. 


40  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

meaning  and  character  of  the  law  was  constantly- 
given,  and  the  hope  that  in  the  fulness  of  time  it 
should  find  its  consummation  in  a  better  and  more 
perfect  revelation  was  in  every  way  nourished  and 
strengthened  and  made  more  definite.  Especially 
was  advance  made  in  revelation  by  the  prophecy — 
which  the  sequel  showed  to  be  still  far  above  the 
people's  comprehension — that  the  Redeemer  must 
reach  His  exaltation  through  the  path  of  humil- 
iation. 

The  theory  of  the  so-called  "  advanced  criticism," 
that  the  Levitical  law  was  not  prior,  but  subsequent 
to  the  teachings  of  the  Prophets,  would  throw  this 
order  into  confusion.  According  to  the  view  here 
followed,  there  was  first  the  example  given  in 
Abraham  of  trust  in  God  as  the  fundamental  prin- 
ciple of  religion,  and,  when  the  people  proved  un- 
equal to  the  reception  of  this  principle,  the  law  was 
"added  because  of  transgressions,"  but  while  it  was 
still  in  force  and  the  people  still  under  its  pupilage, 
prophets  were  sent  age  after  age  to  bring  the  people 
up  by  their  spiritual  teaching  to  that  higher  standard 
for  which  they  had  been  unworthy.  According  to 
the  view  of  the  critics,  we  should  have  the  strange 
phenomenon  of  the  higher  instruction  given  first  and 
with  all  the  emphasis  and  prolonged  reiteration  of 
the  prophetic  teaching,  finally  culminating  in  the 
relatively  inferior  teaching  of  the  law.  We  should 
have  the  growing  hope  of  the  universal  spiritual 
kingdom  of  the  Messiah  leading  to  the  narrower 
national  development  of  the  strictly  Jewish  system. 
In  the  midst  of  progress  there  would  be  an  enormous 


PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER   OF  REVELATION.     4 1 

and  long-continued  retrogression.  It  is  true  that,  if 
the  prophetic  teaching  be  compared  with  the  preva- 
lent ideas  and  practice  of  the  mass  of  the  people, 
such  a  retrogression  may  be  made  out ;  but  no  such 
comparison  can  fairly  be  made.  Teaching  must  be 
compared  with  teaching  and  practice  with  practice, 
and  in  both  there  was  a  great  advance.  In  the  gross 
and  sinful  condition  of  the  people  the  effect  of  the 
prophetic  teaching  was  to  rouse  them  gradually 
to  a  sense  of  their  neglect  of  the  letter  of  the  earlier 
revelation,  and  they  were  thus  brought  to  a  better  ob- 
servance of  this,  although  they  continued  to  neglect 
its  spirit  as  taught  by  the  Prophets.  Our  Lord  often 
reproved  the  people  for  this  very  failure  to  rise  to 
the  higher  level  set  before  them,  and  for  their  per- 
verse clinging  to  the  mere  letter  of  the  command- 
ments. 

The  system  of  this  school  of  critics  is  thus  equally 
at  fault  whether  the  Scriptures  be  looked  upon  as 
the  supernaturally  revealed  will  of  God,  or  as  an 
evolution  of  human  thought.  These  two  views,  op- 
posite as  they  are  in  their  fundamental  conceptions, 
yet  have  before  them  the  same  phenomena  of  prog- 
ress. For  if  the  Almighty  has  condescended  to 
adapt  His  revelations  to  human  needs  and  capacities, 
they  must  have  a  growing  development  like  that 
which  would  have  resulted  from  ever-improving 
human  ideas  and  conceptions  during  ages  of  succes- 
sive enlightenment ;  but  after  this  enlightenment 
had  once  reached  the  standard  of  the  prophets  it  is 
inconceivable  that  the  most  advanced  spirits  of  the 
nation,  which   the  writers  of  the  Pentateuch  must 


42  THE  OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS, 

have  been,  could  have  fallen  back  to  the  ceremonial 
part  of  the  law.  It  is  not  hard  to  choose  between 
the  two  views  of  the  origin  of  the  law  on  other 
grounds  ;  but  for  the  present,  it  is  to  be  noted  that 
the  law  can  only  be  considered  subsequent  to  the 
prophets  on  the  supposition  of  an  enormous  back- 
ward step.  This  difficulty  is  partially  met  by  the 
critics  through  the  assumption  that  the  greatest  and 
most  fundamental  doctrine  of  all,  the  unity  of  God, 
was  not  clearly  revealed  to  the  earlier  Israelites,  but 
was  only  gradually  brought  to  light  and  enforced 
by  the  prophets.  To  maintain  this  proposition  they 
find  it  necessary  to  discredit  the  usually  accepted 
historical  data,  and  to  represent  what  are  stated  in 
Scripture  to  be  Divine  rebukes  of  the  people's  sins, 
as  the  struggles  of  a  more  enlightened  and  advancing 
party  against  the  general  darkness  and  prevailing 
polytheism.  Their  argument  is,  that  since  the  idea 
of  the  unity  and  spirituality  of  God  had  not  yet 
been  reached  by  the  mass  of  the  nation,  that  idea 
could  not  have  rested  upon  any  authoritative  basis 
recognized  by  them. 

One  answer  to  all  this  might  be,  that  such  mono- 
theistic conceptions  were  unknown  at  the  time  to 
all  other  nations  of  the  earth,  and  that  there  was 
nothing  in  the  character  of  the  people  of  Israel  to 
put  them  in  advance  of  tl^eir  contemporaries.  A 
certain  sort  of  monotheism  (called  '*  henotheism " 
by  modern  scholars  to  distinguish  it),  had  long  been 
received  in  India  ;  but  it  was  really  the  opposite 
extreme — Pantheism.  In  Egypt,  too,  there  was  a 
belief  in  the  unity  of  God  ;   but  it  was  an  esoteric 


PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER   OF  REVELATION,     43 

doctrine  of  the  priests,  carefully  hidden  from  the 
people,  and  it  is  by  no  means  clear  whether  even 
this  was  really  monotheism  or  only  pantheism.  The 
speculations  of  human  philosophy,  unguided  by  reve- 
lation, have  always  shown  a  pantheistic  tendency; 
but  the  Israelites  were  too  little  given  to  philosophy 
to  be  much  affected  by  this,  and  certainly  their 
Scriptures  show  no  trace  of  such  a  tendency.  If  the 
ideas  of  the  unity  and  holiness  of  God  were  of 
merely  human  development,  the  critics  would  have 
strong  reason  for  placing  the  date  of  their  publica- 
tion in  Israel  as  late  as  possible ;  but  no  date  con- 
sistent with  admitted  historical  facts  would  be  late 
enough  to  sustain  their  argument.  These  ideas  are 
found  among  the  Israelites  far  earlier  than  anywhere 
else,  and  there  is  no  reason  why  this  should  have 
been  so.  About  the  time  of  the  last  of  the  Hebrew 
prophets,  and,  on  any  hypothesis,  long  after  the 
unity  of  God  had  been  proclaimed  among  them, 
Plato  wrought  out  the  idea  as  a  result  of  the  most 
profound  thought ;  but,  even  then,  he  made  small 
approach  to  the  Divine  perfection  and  purity  as  re- 
vealed in  Israel.  The  mass  of  the  Israelites  them- 
selves, down  to  the  period  of  the  captivity,  showed 
a  most  obdurate  attachment  to  polytheism  and  all  its 
degrading  superstitions. 

But  the  views  in  question  must  be  met  on  higher 
grounds.  The  main  point  is  to  determine  whether 
the  ideas  of  the  unity  and  holiness  of  God  with  the 
consequent  duties  of  man,  contained  in  the  Script- 
ures, were  from  a  supernatural  source,  or  a  develop- 
ment of  human   thought.     In  the  latter  case,   the 


44  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

position  of  the  newer  criticism,  as  has  been  seen, 
would  have  a  cogent  argument  in  its  favor,  al- 
though opposed  to  the  best  historical  data  in  our 
possession,  and  not  in  accordance  with  the  view  of 
the  Old  Testament  taken  in  the  New  ;  but  if  the 
former  be  true,  there  is  no  reason  why  these  doc- 
trines should  not  have  been  revealed  at  as  early  an 
era  as  could  have  been  beneficial  to  man. 

This  is  not  the  place  for  any  extended  discussion 
of  the  truth  of  revelation  or  of  the  inspiration  of  the 
Scriptures,  but  only  for  a  few  suggestions  bearing 
upon  the  point  at  issue.  No  stress  can  here  be  laid 
upon  the  view  of  the  older  revelations  taken  by  our 
Lord  and  His  Apostles.  Unquestionably  these  were 
regarded  by  them  as  of  supreme  and  divine  author- 
ity, and  were  quoted  by  them  as  conclusive  of  all 
argument ;  but  it  is  a  first  principle  with  the  "•  newer 
criticism "  that  in  any  scientific  examination  the 
Old  Testament  should  be  considered  by  itself  and 
quite  apart  from  the  view  taken  of  it  in  the  New. 
It  is  not  obvious  why  the  bud  can  be  better  under- 
stood without  reference  to  the  flower,  or  the  embryo 
without  the  light  thrown  upon  its  structure  by  the 
adult.  Nevertheless,  it  may  be  well  to  see  the  con- 
clusions to  which  we  are  led  by  the  evidence  of  the 
Old  Testament  alone.  Its  writers  certainly  claim  to 
speak  by  express  command  of  God,  and  often  pre- 
face their  utterances  by  *'  Thus  saith  the  Lord  ;  " 
but  to  the  critics  this  is  inconclusive.  We  are  told 
that  this  is  merely  an  accustomed  formula  of  the 
writers  to  express  their  belief  that  the  best  outcome 
of  their  own  thoughts  was  really  divine  truth  ;  that 


PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER  OF  REVELATION.     45 

they  only  meant  to  say  that  God  spoke  by  them  as 
He  speaks  by  every  man  who  attains  to  worthy  con- 
ceptions of  Him  and  of  His  character  and  deaHngs. 
The  apparent  force  of  these  expressions  is  therefore 
set  aside. 

Prophecy  has  been  often  appealed  to,  and  was 
appealed  to  in  a  very  marked  way  by  some  of  the 
Old  Testament  writers  themselves  as  a  positive 
proof  that  their  utterances  were  directed  from  on 
high.  This  will  be  considered  in  the  Lecture  on 
Prophecy.^  The  distinct  foretelling  of  future  events 
which  could  not  be  foreseen  by  human  sagacity,  and 
which  were  accomplished  as  foretold,  is  admitted  on 
all  sides  as  a  conclusive  proof  of  divine  communica- 
tion.  But  here,  as  everywhere  else,  the  critics  have 
seized  beforehand  on  every  possible  source  of  proof, 
and  declared  it  untrustworthy.  Either  the  usually 
accepted  date  of  the  prophecy  is  challenged  and  it  is 
made  into  a  vaticinmm  post  eventum,  or,  when  this 
cannot  be  done,  it  is  interpreted  as  not  meaning 
what  it  has  always  been  understood  to  mean.  But 
notwithstanding  these  and  other  objections,  there 
remain  some  prophecies  the  date  of  which  is  beyond 
all  gainsaying,  and  the  interpretation  of  which  is  un- 
questionable. Instances  will  be  given  in  the  Lect- 
ure on  Prophecy.  Meantime  this  source  of  proof 
must  also  be  passed  by. 

Independently  of  any  such  specific  evidence,  there 

are  two  broad  and  general  considerations  having  an 

important  bearing  on  the  question.     One  of  these, 

already  alluded  to,  is  the  superiority  of  the  Jewish 

*  Lecture  VII. 


46  THE   OLD  Ai\D  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

system  to  any  and  all  other  religions  which  can  be 
compared  with  it  in  antiquity.  Take,  as  a  single 
illustration,  a  point  which  directly  or  indirectly 
involves  all  man's  relations  to  his  fellow-man — the 
equality  of  all  men  before  God.  This  was  taught  in 
the  institutions  of  the  law  in  every  variety  of  form. 
There  was  precisely  the  same  redemption  money  for 
every  soul,  the  same  sin-offering  (except  in  some 
cases  of  official  responsibility)  for  every  transgres- 
sor, the  same  defilements,  and  the  same  means  of 
purification ;  withal  there  was  an  equal  division  of 
the  land,  the  fee  of  which  was  regarded  as  vested  in 
God  Himself,  all  inheritances  were  the  same,  and 
every  one,  priests  and  Levites  not  excepted,  stood 
on  precisely  the  same  footing  before  the  penal  law. 
Slavery,  greatly  modified,  was  still  suffered  ;  but  the 
slave  stood  on  the  same  footing  as  his  master  before 
God.  In  no  other  nation  on  the  face  of  the  earth 
was  anything  like  this  equality  of  man  recognized 
for  a  long  course  of  centuries;  in  fact  it  has  never 
been,  to  any  practical  purpose,  except  under  the 
influence  of  Christianity.  Again  :  if  the  Bible  story 
of  the  creation  and  of  the  early  history  of  mankind 
be  compared  with  those  of  other  nations,  the  vast 
superiority  of  the  Hebrew  record  is  acknowledged 
even  by  those  most  unwilling  to  recognize  its  divine 
Source.  The  best  of  them,  as  already  noticed  in 
regard  to  "  the  Chaldean  Genesis,"  are  pervaded 
with  polytheism  and  with  a  mass  of  superstitious 
legend  in  strange  contrast  to  the  simplicity  and 
purity  of  the  Mosaic  wriLings.  The  question  of 
relative  antiquity  need  not  here  be  raised  ;  the  point 


PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER  OF  REVELATION.     47 

is  simply  their  comparative  purity,  truth,  and  excel- 
lence. Other  illustrations,  such  as  the  duty  of  love 
to  neighbors,  of  kindness  to  the  poor  and  to  slaves, 
and  the  like,  will  occur  to  every  mind.  The  higher 
ideas  of  God,  His  omnipotence  and  omnipresence, 
His  freedom  from  human  passions  and  impurities, 
were  known  only  to  the  Hebrew,  except  in  so  far  as 
the  shadow  of  them  was  recognized  in  the  vague- 
ness of  pantheistic  systems.  This  superiority  of  the 
Jewish  system  is  a  phenomenon  to  be  accounted  for. 
Human  evolution  is  an  insufficient  cause  in  view  of 
the  character  of  the  people  as  shown  in  their  his- 
tory, and  of  the  immense  interval  of  time  by  which 
their  higher  ideas  were  separated  from  those  of 
other  nations.  There  is  but  one  other  rational  ex- 
planation :  that  these  ideas  were  communicated  to 
them  from  without ;  and,  there  being  no  other  ex- 
ternal source  for  them,  this  must  have  been  from 
above. 

The  other  consideration  referred  to  as  showing  a 
superhuman  origin  of  the  Hebrew  religion  is,  that 
this  religion,  universally  recognized  as  so  much 
above  all  others  of  its  time,  confessed  its  own 
insufficiency  and  looked  definitely  forward  for  its 
completion  to  the  future.  Something  of  this  kind 
is,  indeed,  to  be  found  everywhere.  There  certainly 
was  such  a  thing  as  a  Desire  of  all  nations,  and  the 
Magi  of  the  East  looked  for  the  birth  of  "the  King 
of  the  Jews."  God  left  not  Himself  without  wit- 
ness, and  the  echoes  of  the  primeval  promise  are 
more  or  less  dimly  heard  among  all  nations.  It  was 
generally   felt  that  the  world  had  gone  awry,  and 


48  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

that  it  must  in  some  way  be  restored,  and  this  hope 
was  naturally  connected  with  the  expectation  of  a 
personal  Restorer.  There  was  also  some  perception 
that  to  this  end  wickedness  must  cease  and  a  reign 
of  righteousness  be  spread  over  the  earth.  These 
were  precious  rays  from  the  Source  of  truth  glim- 
mering in  the  darkness,  and,  without  doubt,  helped 
much  to  prepare  the  minds  of  men  for  the  reception 
of  the  Gospel ;  but  in  themselves  they  were  either 
vague  hopes  or  philosophical  speculations  concern- 
ing the  ultimate  outcome  of  all  sublunary  things. 
They  had  little  living  power  over  the  hearts  and 
lives  of  those  by  whom  they  were  held,  and  the 
notion  of  righteousness,  as  connected  with  these  ex- 
pectations, was  very  confused  and  imperfect.  With 
Israel  the  hope  of  the  future  had  a  very  different 
character.  It  was  constantly  renewed  and  quick- 
ened and  made  definite  by  the  successive  prophetic 
utterances.  With  a  far  clearer  revelation  of  God's 
righteousness,  there  was  more  of  a  sense  of  sin  and 
of  the  need  of  repentance  and  of  forgiveness.  The 
sad  attitude  of  heathenism  is  voiced  by  Plato,  when, 
discoursing  of  the  universal  sinfulness  of  man  and 
of  the  inefficiency  of  all  remedies,  he  says  that  he 
stands  in  sore  need  of  a  deliverer,  but  knows  not 
where  to  find  him.  Israel  was  taught  to  look  for 
the  Messianic  kingdom  with  a  personal  Redeemer 
from  all  sin,  and  Teacher  of  all  truth.  This  con- 
trast between  the  religion  of  the  Hebrews  and  that 
of  all  other  nations  is  too  plain  and  too  generally 
recognized  to  need  proof.  With  the  Jews  it  was  a 
practical  belief,  a  daily  thought  of  the  knowledge 


PROGRESSIVE    CHARACTER  OF  REVELATION:     49 

and  the  bliss  which  the  expected  Messiah  should 
bring  to  the  earth ;  *'  Blessed  is  he  that  shall  eat 
bread  in  the  kingdom  of  God,"  -  was  their  common 
thought,  and  ''  I  know  that  Messias  cometh  .... 
when  He  is  come,  He  will  tell  us  all  things,"  f  was 
the  belief  which  had  passed  over  from  them  to  their 
neighbors  who  held,  in  part,  to  the  same  Scriptures. 
The  whole  reason  of  their  national  existence  was 
to  prepare  the  way  for  the  Messianic  kingdom. 
Then  all  doubts  were  to  be  solved,  all  sin  removed. 
But  why  should  it  have  been  so  ?  Why  this  differ- 
ence between  Jewish  and  all  other  human  thought? 
Was  there  any  reason  why  the  evolution  of  religious 
ideas  among  this  people  should  have  been  in  such 
contrast  with  the  universal  laws  of  evolution  among 
all  other  nations  ?  Again :  there  seems  but  one 
possible  solution  of  the  enigma ;  in  the  case  of 
other  nations  there  may  have  been,  there  undoubt- 
edly were,  some  dim  recollections  of  the  early  prom- 
ise, and  some  uncertain  expectations  of  the  future ; 
but  to  the  Israelites  the  truth  came  with  the  clear- 
ness and  fulness  of  special  revelation. 

The  phenomena,  then,  sustain  the  claim  which  the 
Scriptures  everywhere  make  for  themselves,  that 
they  are  a  revelation  from  God.  It  remains,  how- 
ever, that  this  revelation  was  progressive,  because 
only  in  that  way  was  it  possible  that  man  could  re- 
ceive it.  Nowhere  is  it  possible  for  him  to  attain, 
or  even  to  comprehend,  perfect  truth  at  a  bound. 
He  is  obliged  to  gain  first  one  elementary  fact  or 
principle,  and  then  by  means  of  this  to  advance  to 

*  Luke,  xiv.  15.  f  John,  iv.  25. 

4 


so  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

another  which  must  often  seriously  modify  his  con- 
ception of  the  first.  In  the  study  of  language,  he 
must  master  the  rule  before  he  can  learn  the  ex- 
ception. The  Ptolemaic  system  in  astronomy  was 
the  necessary  means  of  systematizing  observations 
until  they  should  lead  to  the  Copernican  ;  the  Co- 
pernican  must  begin  by  the  assumption  of  circular 
orbits  and  uniform  motions  of  the  planets  until  these 
could  lead  to  the  discovery  of  elliptical  orbits  and 
the  doctrine  of  the  radius  vector.  Still  our  present 
knowledge  is  imperfect.  The  law  of  gravity  and 
the  observed  facts  of  astronomy  are  not  in  perfect 
accord.  Each  new  discovery,  as  of  the  asteroids 
and  of  Neptune,  brings  about  a  closer  harmony; 
but  we  cannot  expect  to  see  in  nature  a  perfect  re- 
alization of  the  law  until  we  can  look  out  upon  its 
completeness  from  the  footstool  of  the  throne  of  the 
Omniscient*  The  same  thing  is  true  of  chemistry 
and  of  all  other  natural  sciences,  and  indeed  of  all 
human  knowledge.  As  already  said,  the  elements, 
the  most  essential  points,  must  be  thoroughly  fixed 
in  the  mind  before  it  can  receive  their  modifica- 
tions. Were  the  process  reversed  and  the  fuller 
truth  set  at  once  before  the  untrained  thought,  the 
result  could  only  be  disastrous,  and  positive  miscon- 
ceptions take  the  place  of  simple  imperfect  appre- 
hension. The  child  now,  as  well  as  the  race  in  its 
childhood,  must  learn  of  the  unity  of  God,  before  it 
can  be  profitably,  or  even  safely,  taught  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity.  Any  other  course  will  be  sure 
to  lead  to  the  error  of  Tritheism. 

*  See  Cooke's  Chemical  Physics,  at  the  close  of  §  i66. 


PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER  OF  REVELATION.      5  I 

This,  then,  being  the  law  of  all  human  knowledge, 
it  was  plainly  necessary  that  if  revelation  was  to  be 
useful  to  man,  it  should  be  conformed  to  the  same 
method,  and  the  fact  that  our  heavenly  Father  has 
thus  adapted  the  communication  of  His  truth  to 
our  necessities,  so  far  from  implying  that  this  com- 
munication is  not  from  Him,  does  but  show  it  to  be 
in  harmony  with  all  His  other  works.  It  is  the 
great  merit  of  the  so-called  *'  theory  of  evolution  " 
that  it  has  brought  all  intelligent  thought  to  a  rec- 
ognition of  this  fact.  This  cannot  in  the  least  do 
away  with  the  necessity  of  recognizing  Him  as  the 
Author  of  nature,  but  it  does  show  that  the  manifes- 
tations of  His  work  are  in  orderly  and  systematic 
succession.  In  history,  in  the  science  of  language, 
in  the  development  of  character,  whether  in  the  in- 
dividual or  in  the  race,  the  same  truth  holds.  Every- 
where the  same  Unchangeable  Being  is  consistent 
with  Himself,  and  manifests  Himself  in  similar  ways. 
Theology  owes  a  large  debt  of  gratitude  to  the 
negative  critics  in  bringing  more  fully  to  light  the 
same  characteristics  in  the  progress  of  revelation. 
Only  here,  as  in  natural  science,  care  must  be  taken 
not  to  mistake  the  method  for  the  Source,  and  to 
imagine  that  because  God  adapted  His  teaching  to 
man's  needs  and  capacities,  therefore  man  could 
have  learned  all  that  he  needed  himself. 

But  it  is  timQ  to  return  to  the  examination  of  the 
actual  fact  of  the  progress  of  revelation.  Of  the  im- 
mense advance  made  in  passing  from  the  Old  Tes- 
tament to  the  New  there  is  no  need  to  speak,  for  it 
is  plain  to  every  reader.     A  period  of  centuries  had 


52  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

passed  since  the  voice  of  the  last  of  the  prophets 
was  hushed,  giving  the  Church  ample  time  for  re- 
flection. She  had  been  led  through  strange  vicissi- 
tudes of  history  adapted  to  impress  strongly  upon 
the  people  a  sense  of  the  overruling  hand  of  God 
and  of  their  utter  dependence  upon  Him.  When 
the  voice  of  John,  therefore,  was  heard  in  the  wilder- 
ness, it  came  upon  a  people  largely  prepared  for  his 
message  and  ready  to  flock  in  crowds  to  his  baptism 
of  repentance  in  the  immediate  expectation  of  Him 
Who  was  to  follow.  It  now  becomes  necessary  to 
trace  the  same  progress  of  revelation  in  the  New 
Testament.*  Here  it  is  to  be  expected  that  the  ra- 
pidity of  the  progress  would  be  greatly  accelerated, 
just  as  all  human  progress  is  ordinarily,  in  geometric 
ratio.  First  steps  must  always  be  slow,  but  when 
once  made,  become  the  means  of  more  rapid  ad- 
vance. In  tracing  this  progress  it  will  be  necessary 
to  follow  the  order  of  the  teaching  contained  in  the 
various  books  rather  than  that  of  the  publication  of 
the  books  themselves.  Some  of  the  Epistles  were 
written  before  any  of  the  Gospels  ;  but  the  subject- 
matter  of  the  Gospels  had  long  been  taught  orally, 
and  therefore  really  came  first. 

Before  entering  on  the  subject  itself  it  may  be  well 
to  guard  against  a  misapprehension.  The  whole 
New  Testament  teaching  was  comprised  within  the 
limits  of  much  less  than  a  century;  eighteen  centu- 

*  See  on  this  subject  The  Progress  of  Doctrine  hi  the  Nezu  Testa- 
ment, being  the  Bampton  Lectures  for  1866,  by  Rev.  T.  D.  Bernard. 
An  American  edition  was  printed  from  the  second  London,  in  Boston, 

1872. 


PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER   OF  REVELATION.     53 

ries  have  since  passed  away  and  there  has  been 
great  progress  in  the  appreciation  and  the  practical 
appHcation  of  the  truth  taught  at  first.  Is  this  lat- 
ter advance  to  be  included  in  "  the  progress  of  rev- 
elation ?  "  Certainly  not.  Revelation  is  from  above. 
In  the  course  of  its  communication  to  man  there 
have  ever  been  long  pauses,  that  the  truth  already 
given  might  be  sufficiently  understood  and  assimi- 
lated by  man  to  fit  him  for  further  disclosures. 
Such  a  pause,  though  not  indeed  absolute,  followed 
for  many  centuries  after  the  giving  of  the  law ;  and 
total  silence,  again  for  centuries,  preceded  the  Chris- 
tian revelation.  That  revelation  declared  itself  a 
finality  and  left  nothing  more  to  be  communicated 
to  man  until  by  this  he  should  be  prepared  for  that 
higher  state  of  existence  in  which  he  **  shall  see  face 
to  face"  and  "know  even  as  he  is  known." "^  But 
meantime  the  revelation  itself  was  so  much  higher 
and  better  than  what  had  gone  before  that  a  very 
long  period  must  be  required  for  man  to  rise  to  its 
requirements.  We  can  trace  in  history,  in  the  im- 
proved recognition  of  the  rights  of  man,  in  mission- 
ary enterprise,  in  benevolent  activity  of  every  kind, 
and  above  all,  in  an  increased  sense  of  responsibility 
and  in  higher  ideas  of  duty  to  God,  a  most  marked 
gain  in  the  acceptance  and  the  understanding  of 
Christian  truth ;  but  this  has  nothing  to  do  with  the 
progress  of  revelation  itself.  That  ceased  for  the 
time  with  the  last  line  of  the  inspired  Apostolic 
writing,  and  "  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints" 
became  then  complete,  until  the  end  of  the  present 

*  I  Cor.  xiii.  12. 


54  THE  OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

dispensation  shall  bring  forth  a  fresh  flood  of  light 
in  that  Hfe  when  we  shall  no  longer  "  see  through  a 
glass  darkly."  Our  present  concern,  therefore,  must 
be  with  the  New  Testament  itself,  and  not  with  the 
growing  appreciation  of  this  through  the  ages. 

The  New  Testament  begins  with  the  Gospels.  As 
already  said,  these  were  not  the  first  books  written, 
but  they  contain  the  record  of  what  was  said  and 
done  by  the  Author  of  our  religion  while  still  in  the 
flesh.  Even  within  these  how  great  is  the  progress 
from  the  first  announcement  of  the  forerunner  of 
the  promised  Messiah  to  the  cross  on  Calvary,  the 
resurrection  and  the  ascension.  Yet  the  Gospels  as 
a  whole,  while  they  present  the  life  and  work  of 
Christ,  and  record  His  pregnant  teachings  as  the 
foundation  of  all  that  was  afterwards  to  be  more 
fully  explained,  must  be  considered,  in  reference  to 
what  follows,  as  elementary,  and  must  close  with 
the  declaration  of  the  Master,  '■'■  I  have  yet  many 
things  to  say  unto  you,  but  ye  cannot  bear  them 
now.  Howbeit  when  He,  the  Spirit  of  Truth,  is 
come.  He  will  guide  you  into  all  truth."  *  If  the 
works  and  discourses  of  our  Lord  be  followed  in  the 
Gospels  in  chronological  sequence,  a  marked  and 
visible  progress  is  manifest  from  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  to  the  last  discourse  with  the  disciples.  Per- 
haps no  more  obvious  proof  of  this  can  be  given 
than  the  way  in  which  He  was  regarded  by  the 
people.  In  the  early  part  of  His  ministry  crowds 
pressed  around  Him,  eager  to  see  His  works  and 
hear  His  words.    He  "  made  and  baptized  more  dis- 

*  John,  xvi.  12,  13. 


PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER  OF  REVELATION,     55 

ciples  than  John."*  At  the  close,  notwithstanding 
the  many  who  believed  on  Him,  and  the  Hosannas 
of  His  triumphal  entry  into  Jerusalem,  He  was  "  de- 
spised and  rejected  "  by  the  great  majority  of  the 
nation,  and  when  He  stood  before  Pilate,  multi- 
tudes were  found  ready  to  cry  '*  Crucify  Him,  cru- 
cify Him."  This  change  was  the  result  of  the  char- 
acter of  His  teaching.  At  first  He  dealt  gently  with 
the  ignorance  of  the  people.  He  unfolded  to  them, 
indeed,  the  highest  morality  and  deeper  views  than 
they  had  ever  conceived  of  the  nature  of  God  and 
of  the  spirituality  of  His  requirements ;  but  when 
He  began  to  show  plainly  that  His  ''  kingdom  was 
not  of  this  world,"  when  He  taught  that  the  path 
to  glory  must  lie  through  humiliation  and  suffering, 
that  He  himself  must  "  be  lifted  up  from  the  earth," 
and  that  His  disciples  must  needs  take  up  the  cross 
and  deny  themselves  if  they  would  follow  Him, — 
then,  indeed,  there  was  a  progress  in  the  revelation 
He  was  making,  but  a  progress  as  yet  above  the 
capacity  of  the  people,  and  they  turned  against 
Him.  There  are  two  points  in  our  Lord's  teaching 
which  are  of  especial  importance,  and  which  may 
serve  for  examples  of  all.  Every  one  will  recognize 
at  once  the  increasing  clearness  and  fulness  with 
which  they  are  brought  out  during  the  course  of 
His  ministry  on  earth.  The  first  of  these  points  is 
the  putting  Himself  forward  as  the  centre  and  ob- 
ject of  our  faith,  and  belief  in  Him  as  the  turning 
point  between  death  and  life.  There  is  compara- 
tively little  of  this  in  His  early  teaching  of  the  mul- 

*  John,  iv.  I,  2. 


$6  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

titudes.  Yet  it  was  no  new  point  in  His  doctrine, 
as  some  have  tried  to  think.  It  comes  out  in  His 
private  interview  with  Nicodemus,  an  intelligent 
and  well-disposed  ruler  of  Israel,*  and  it  appears  in 
His  conversation,  outside  of  the  people  of  Israel, 
with  the  woman  of  Samaria  ;f  but  it  does  not  enter 
as  a  marked  feature  into  His  public  teaching  of  the 
people  until  His  discourse  on  the  bread  of  life,  at 
Capernaum,  at  the  time  of  the  last  Passover  before 
His  suffering,:^  and  it  only  appears  in  its  fulness  after 
the  institution  of  the  Lord's  supper  in  the  few  hours 
preceding  His  arrest  and  death.§  The  other  point 
is  the  foretelling  His  own  death  and  resurrection. 
This  again  was  intimated  from  time  to  time  in  pri- 
vate. It  was  suggested  to  Nicodemus ;  ||  it  was  oc- 
casionally spoken  of  to  His  immediate  disciples; 
but  only  after  His  transfiguration,  during  the  last 
year  of  His  ministry,  did  it  become  a  frequent  and 
express  subject  of  His  teaching.  These  two  are 
among  the  most  important  points  of  all,  and  in  re- 
gard to  them  there  is  a  marked  progress  in  the  teach- 
ing. Even  to  His  immediate  disciples  in  His  last 
discourse  with  th^m  He  said  "  these  things  I  said 
not  unto  you  at  the  beginning,  because  I  was  with 
you."  T  All  these  references  have  been  cited  from 
the  Gospel  of  St.  John.  This  Gospel  relates,  of 
course,  to  the  same  period  as  that  covered  by  the 
Synoptic  Gospels ;  but  it  was  written  later,  and  in 
the  record  it  gives  there  is  a  progress  so  marked  in 
the  bringing  out  of  the  deeper  signification  and  the 

*  John,  iii.  13-18.         f  lb.  iv.  10,  14,  26  %  ^^-  vi- 

§  lb.  xiv.-xvi.  II  lb.  iii.  14.  ^  lb.  xvi.  4. 


PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER   OF  REVELATION.     57 

spiritual  force  of  our  Lord's  words  as  to  have  at- 
tracted the  attention  of  its  readers  in  all  ages. 

When  one  passes  from  the  Gospels  to  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles  he  passes  from  the  record  of  our  Lord's 
human  life  upon  earth  to  that  of  the  teaching  of 
His  Apostles  under  the  guidance  of  His  Holy  Spirit. 
Great  events,  of  fundamental  importance  for  the 
salvation  of  man,  occurred  on  the  confines  of  the 
two  periods.  Our  Lord  had  given  up  His  life  upon 
the  cross  for  the  salvation  of  men,  He  had  tri- 
umphed over  death  in  the  resurrection,  and  He  had 
ascended  to  the  glory  which  He  had  with  the  Father 
before  the  world  was.  In  the  last  forty  days  He 
made  definite  provision  for  the  establishment  of  His 
Church  as  an  universal  and  visible  organization  in 
the  Apostolic  commission,  **  Go  ye  into  all  the  world, 
and  preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature.  He  that 
believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved.'"^  The 
Apostles  did  not  at  first  understand  the  significance 
of  these  things.  They  were  not  fully  enlightened 
by  His  talking  with  them  during  the  forty  days  be- 
fore His  ascension  **  of  the  things  pertaining  to  the 
kingdom  of  God,"  and  even  to  the  last  moment  they 
could  ask,  in  the  full  spirit  of  the  Jewish  expecta- 
tion of  temporal  dominion,  "  Lord,  wilt  Thou  at  this 
time  restore  again  the  kingdom  to  Israel?"')'  But 
after  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  on  the  day  of 
Pentecost,  a  flood  of  light  burst  upon  them,  and 
thenceforward  they  began  to  preach  "  Christ  and 
Him  crucified."  Jesus,  put  to  death  for  our  sins 
and    risen    again   for  our  justification,   became  the 

*  Mark,  xvi.  15,  16.  f  Acts,  i.  6. 


58  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

burden  of  their  teaching.  The  record  of  the  Acts 
is  a  record  of  constant  progress  in  the  organization 
of  the  Church ;  in  the  proclamation  of  faith  in 
Christ  as  the  means  of  salvation  ;  in  the  extension 
of  Christianity  outward  from  its  centre  and  cra- 
dle in  Jerusalem,  first  to  other  Jewish  communities, 
and  then  to  the  Gentiles ;  in  the  discussion  and 
decision  of  the  question  as  to  the  continued  obliga- 
tion of  the  Gentile  converts  to  observe  the  Mosaic 
law  ;  and  in  the  establishment  of  the  new  faith  as 
a  universal  religion  in  all  the  great  centres  of  the 
world's  activity. 

Then  come  the  Epistles,  written  to  a  considerable 
extent  during  the  period  covered  by  the  history  of 
the  Acts,  but  also  extending  beyond.  These  found 
their  occasion,  in  most  cases,  in  special  circum- 
stances and  in  the  needs  of  particular  churches  ; 
but  they  contain,  nevertheless,  the  mature  and  de- 
liberate setting  forth,  in  some  instances  system- 
atically, of  Christian  truth,  both  in  its  theoretical 
and  its  practical  aspects.  They  contain  nothing,  it 
is  true,  which  may  not  be  found  in  germ  in  our 
Lord's  own  teaching  in  the  Gospels,  and  in  His  life 
and  death  for  the  salvation  of  man ;  and  they  neces- 
sarily lack  the  power  which  can  belong  only  to  the 
direct  words  of  the  Source  of  all  truth.  No  new 
revelation  is  made  in  them ;  but  the  germ  already 
given  and  not  understood  is  here  unfolded  and  de- 
veloped under  the  Holy  Spirit's  guidance,  as  with- 
out that  guidance  it  never  could  have  been  devel- 
oped by  man  alone.  It  is  not  that  they  constitute 
a  higher  revelation  in  themselves ;   but   they  are  a 


PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER   OF  REVELATION.     59 

Divine  explanation  of  the  Gospels,  and  thus  lead  us 
farther  and  deeper  into  their  meaning  than  we 
could  otherwise  have  gone.  They  make  known  to 
us  that  mind  of  God  which  was  in  the  Gospels,  but 
which  we  could  only  have  imperfectly  discovered 
without  their  aid.  Thus,  as  the  unfolding  and  ex- 
planation of  that  Divine  teaching  on  which  they 
were  founded,  they  become  the  crowning  treasure 
of  Christian  literature. 

In  the  Epistles,  too,  there  is  a  more  frequent  and 
express  looking  forward  to  the  final  goal  of  all 
progress  since  the  world  began,  when  the  Church 
militant  shall  be  swallowed  up  in  the  Church  tri- 
umphant. The  figurative  language  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse contains  indeed  the  fullest  description  of  the 
"heavenly  Jerusalem"  and  of  "the  pure  river  of 
water  of  life  ;  "  but  we  hear  also  in  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  of  our  coming  "  unto  Mount  Sion, 
and  unto  the  city  of  the  living  God,  the  heavenly 
Jerusalem,  and  to  an  innumerable  company  of  an- 
gels, to  the  general  assembly  and  church  of  the 
first-born  which  are  written  in  heaven,  and  to  God 
the  Judge  of  all,  and  to  the  spirits  of  just  men 
made  perfect,  and  to  Jesus  the  Mediator  of  the 
New  Covenant."*  Both  in  the  Epistles  and  in  the 
Book  of  Revelation  we  learn  of  the  time  when 
"  the  Lord  Himself  shall  descend  from  heaven  with 
a  shout,  with  the  voice  of  the  archangel,  and  with 
the  trump  of  God,  and  the  dead  in  Christ  shall 
rise,"  when  "  we  shall  be   caught  up  together  with 

*  Heb.  xii.  22-24. 


60  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

them  in  the  clouds,"  *  and  the  faithful  of  all  ages 
shall  be  gathered  before  the  throne  to  pour  out 
their  endless  thanksgivings  to  the  Lamb.  Thus  is 
unfolded  something  of  the  meaning  of  our  Lord's 
reiterated  teaching  of  the^  eternal  life — beginning 
here  below,  but  consummated  above — which  so 
warmed  the  heart  of  St.  Paul,  (as  of  every  true  be- 
liever), that  he  thought  it  "  far  better  "  to  depart 
and  be  with  Christ. 

Thus  looking  over  the  whole  course  of  revelation, 
from  the  material  and  typical  Paradise  in  the 
Garden  of  Eden  to  the  true  Paradise  above  watered 
by  "  the  river  of  life,"  there  is  seen  throughout  in 
the  highest  and  truest  sense  an  evolution  of  heavenly 
truth.  I  have  tried  to  show  that  this  could  not 
have  been  a  mere  human  evolution,  but  must  have 
been  from  above,  God  ever  limiting  His  revelation 
to  the  needs  and  the  capacities  of  those  to  whom 
it  was  given.  In  this  His  action  has  been  in 
most  complete  harmony  with  all' His  other  works. 
Progress  is  the  most  characteristic  feature  of  the 
universe,  and  the  great  advance  of  modern  science, 
in  other  words  of  the  knowledge  of  God's  works, 
has  been  in  the  recognition  of  this  progress  from 
the  chaos  of  which  Moses  tells  us  to  the  wonderful 
cosmos  spread  out  all  around  us.  In  a  true  and 
thoughtful  recognition  of  that  progress  in  revela- 
tion is  to  be  found  the  solution  of  most  of  the 
difficulties  which  trouble  the  superficial  reader  of 
the  Old  Testament,  and  the  warrant  for  our  own 
highest  hopes  of  the  future. 

*  I  Thess.  iv.  i6,  17. 


PROGRESSIVE   CHARACTER   OF  REVELATION.     6l 

The  life  of  the  race  is  mirrored  in  the  life  of  the 
individual,  and  we  can  only  progress  in  the  knowl- 
edge of  God  and  the  grace  of  His  Son  and  the 
enlightenment  of  His  Spirit  as  we  receive  and  as- 
similate in  our  own  inner  and  outer  life  the  knowl- 
edge and  grace  already  given. 


LECTURE  III. 

THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  PREPARATORY  FOR  THE  NEW. 

The  essential  unity  of  the  two  Dispensations 
having  been  pointed  out  in  the  first  lecture,  and  the 
progressive  character  of  all  revelation  in  the  second, 
it  remains  to  show  in  the  present  that  the  Old 
Testament  was  given  for  the  purpose  of  preparing 
for  the  New,  and  to  say  something  of  what  seems  to 
us  the  strange  conduct  of  some  of  its  heroes.  The 
purpose  of  the  many  detailed  precepts  of  the  law 
must  be  reserved  for  the  following  lecture. 

That,  in  fact,  the  Old  Dispensation  did  prepare  the 
way  for  the  New  is  a  matter  of  history;  it  is  also 
true  that  it  was  given  and  continued  for  this  very 
purpose.  The  Gospel  was  the  raison  d'etre,  the  ground 
and  cause  of  Israel's  existence.  This  fact  is  left  out 
of  sight  by  the  theory  that  Israel's  religion  was 
simply  one  among  the  many  religions  of  the  world, 
better  perhaps  than  any  other,  but  developed  in  the 
same  way  and  having  essentially  the  same  purposes  ; 
for  if  the  Old  Dispensation  did  not  exist  for  itself, 
but  was  designed  as  a  preparation  .for  the  New,  it 
is  plain  that  such  a  theory  cannot  be  maintained. 
Whatever  may  be  said  of  the  argument  from  design 
in  nature,  in  revelation  the  design  is  expressed  be- 
forehand and  cannot  be  gainsaid.     That  there  was 


OLD  TESTAMENT  PREPARATORY  FOR  NEW.     63 

such  design  was  the  claim  of  our  Lord,  when  speak- 
ing of  the  sacred  books  of  the  Jews  in  general,  He 
said,  "  they  are  they  which  testify  of  Me."  *  The 
same  thought  was  in  the  mind  of  St.  Peter  when 
he  wrote,  ''  Of  which  salvation  the  prophets  have 
searched  and  enquired  diligently,  who  prophesied  of/ 
the  grace  that  should  come  unto  you."  f  Such  in 
general  is  the  understanding  of  all  the  writers  of  the 
New  Testament,  who  continually  and  unhesitatingly 
speak  both  of  the  Old  Dispensation  itself  and  of  its 
sacred  records  as  a  designed  preparation  for  the  New. 
This  is  most  fully  brought  out  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  because  that  epistle  is  occupied  with  the 
argument  on  this  very  point ;  but  no  reader  of  the 
New  Testament  can  fail  to  see  that  it  is  the  under- 
lying thought  of  all  its  writers  in  their  references 
to  the  older  Scriptures.  For  the  purposes  of  the 
present  discussion,  it  is  by  no  means  necessary  to 
assume  the  truth  and  reliability  of  the  Scriptures. 
The  point  is  simply  that  the  Old  Dispensation  was 
for  the  sake  of  the  New,  and  this  is  a  question  not 
depending  upon  the  trustworthiness  of  either  of 
them.  It  may  be  noted  in  passing  that  if  this  is  once 
admitted,  the  Divine  authorship  of  both  can  hardly 
be  denied  ;  but  this  is  a  consequence,  and  not  a 
condition  precedent.  For  the  present  the  attention 
may  be  confined  to  the  representations  given  in  the 
Scriptures  themselves. 

The  primary  fact  in  the  history  of  Israel  is  the 
migration  of  Abraham.  If  this  had  been  an  ordinary 
tribal  movement,  as  some  critics  assume,  it  would 

*  John,  V.  39.  \  I  Pet.  i.  lO. 


64  THE  OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

have  little  significance  for  our  purpose;  but  the 
Scripture  narrative  does  not  so  represent  it.  This 
expressly  declares  it  to  have  taken  place  at  the  com- 
mand of  God  Himself."^  This  command  cannot  be 
interpreted  as  a  mere  conviction  of  the  patriarch's 
own  mind,  devoutly  referred  to  the  Being  whom  he 
worshipped  ;  for  it  is  grounded  on  the  primeval 
promise,  and  is  a  limitation  of  its  fulfilment  to  his 
posterity:  "In  thee  shall  all  the  families  of  the 
earth  be  blessed."  f  Throughout  the  whole  story  of 
Abraham's  life  it  is  clear  that  the  Scriptures  repre- 
sent Abraham  as  called  to  leave  his  country  and 
kindred  in  view  of  some  great  and  universal  blessing 
to  come  through  him.  A  choice  was  made  among 
his  posterity,  all  his  other  sons  were  set  aside,  and 
the  child  of  promise,  Sarah's  son  Isaac,  was  selected 
with  the  same  object.  This  was  again  repeated  in 
the  next  generation,  Esau  was  rejected  and  Jacob 
chosen  as  the  heir  of  the  promise:  Then,  w^hen  his 
descendants  had  multiplied  to  a  nation  and  were 
made  the  chosen  people  of  God,  it  was  still  on  the 
ground  that  their  God  was  the  God  of  Abraham, 
Isaac,  and  Jacob,  and  would  fulfil  to  them  the 
promise  made  to  their  fathers.  They  w^ere  delivered 
from  bondage  and  led  to  the  foot  of  Sinai  and  the 
Mosaic  legislation  given  them.  The  great  features 
of  this  legislation  were  the  sacrificial  system  and  the 
priesthood.  These  I  hope  to  show  hereafter  distinctly 

*  Gen.  xii.  i  ;   xv.  7. 

f  Gen.  xii.  3.  The  gloss  which  would  make  this  read,  "by  thee 
shall  all  the  families  of  the  earth  bless  themselves,"  seems  hardly- 
worthy  of  consideration,  and  is  inconsistent  with  the  whole  narrative. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  PREPARATORY  FOR  NEW.     65 

looked  forward  to  the  New  Dispensation,  and  were 
only  given  in  view  of  it.  Minor  features  showing 
the  same  thing  will  be  taken  up  in  the  next  lecture. 
When  the  lawgiver  was  about  to  be  taken  away,  he 
gave  his  parting  charge  to  the  people.  They  had 
feared  to  come  themselves  into  direct  communion 
with  the  Almighty  and  had  begged  that  Moses 
might  stand  as  a  mediator  between  therh.  What 
were  they  now  to  do  when  he  was  gone  ?  He  tells 
them  they  shall  not  be  left  alone :  "  The  Lord  thy 
God  will  raise  up  unto  thee  a  prophet  from  the  midst 
of  thee,  of  thy  brethren,  like  unto  me  ;  unto  him 
shall  ye  hearken."  "^  The  context,  and  the  needs  of 
the  people  to  whom  this  promise  was  given,  alike 
show  that  it  had  in  view  the  whole  long  line  of  men 
who  from  time  to  time  should  be  commissioned  to 
make  known  the  Divine  will  to  the  people ;  but  it 
meant,  and  it  was  understood  to  mean,  something 
more  than  this.  There  was  to  be  a  culmination  of 
this  line  in  a  special  Prophet,  and  for  Him  the 
people  always  looked  as  THE  Prophet  to  come.  This 
expectation  was  so  strong  as  to  have  passed  over 
even  to  their  Samaritan  nelghbors.f  The  first 
preachers  of  Christianity  shared  in  this  interpretation 
of  their  people  and  believed  the  prophecy  to  be 
fulfilled  in  Christ. if  Thus  the  very  giver  of  the  law 
of  the  Old  Dispensation  turned  the  thoughts  of  the 
people  forward  to  a  future  Mediator.  And  thus  was 
impressed  upon  their  minds,  that,  however  they 
might  glory  in  their  existing  law,  it  was  preparatory 
to  something  higher  and  better. 

*  Deut.  xviii.  15.  f  John,  iv.  25.  \  Acts,  vii.  37. 

5 


66  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

Beyond  this  point  we  have  three  sources  of  evi- 
dence :  history,  the  consciousness  of  the  people,  and 
prophecy.  The  first  of  these  can  appeal  only  to 
those  who  recognize  a  distinctly  Providential  guid- 
ance of  the  course  of  Israel's  history,  such  as  is 
continually  claimed  in  Scripture  ;  but  to  such  the 
evidence  is  clear.  During  the  long  troubled  period 
of  the  Judges,  the  struggle  was  mainly  for  present 
national  life,  and  little  reference  to  the  future  is  to 
be  expected.  Still  even  here,  the  prosperity  and 
adversity  of  the  people  was  visibly  determined  by 
their  faithfulness  or  unfaithfulness  to  Him  who  had 
chosen  them  to  be  the  depositary  of  the  Messianic 
promises.  They  were  rewarded  or  punished,  not 
merely  in  view  of  the  morality  or  immorality  of 
their  conduct,  which  was  a  consequence  ;  but  in  view 
of  their  fealty  to  the  God  of  Israel,  or  their  defection 
from  Him.  He  was  the  God  of  Israel  by  virtue  of 
His  promises  of  the  coming  Redeemer  made  to  their 
fathers.  The  same  fact  is  the  fundamental  and  con- 
trolling fact  of  all  their  subsequent  history.  When 
the  reign  of  David  is  reached  and  for  the  first  time 
so  much  of  order  and  national  consolidation  is 
obtained  that  the  Divine  teaching  can  expressly 
concern  itself  with  the  future,  the  monarch,  forbid- 
den— because  he  had  **  been  a  man  of  war  and  had 
shed  blood  "  ^ — to  carry  out  his  cherished  purpose 
of  building  a  temple,  is  consoled  first  by  the  promise 
that  this  shall  be  done  by  his  son,  and  then  that  to 
his  posterity  shall  be  given  a  '*  kingdom  that  shall 
be  established  forever,"t  its  absolute  perpetuity  being 

*  I  Chron.  xxviii.  3.  f  2  Sam.  vii,  12-16. 


OLD  TESTAMENT  PREPARATORY  FOR  NEW.     6/ 

emphasized  by  a  threefold  repetition  of  the  wdrd 
forever.  From  this  time  forth  "the  kingdom  of 
God  "  or  ''  of  heaven  "  and  the  everlasting  throne  of 
David  became  the  constant  theme  of  sacred  song, 
and  of  the  vision  of  prophecy.  The  people's  minds 
were  filled  with  the  thought  of  the  glorious  future 
before  them  ;  they  were  accustomed  to  look  upon 
the  Dispensation  under  which  they  lived  as  prepara- 
tory for  that  which  was  to  follow,  and  their  habitual 
thought  is  expressed  in  the  exclamation,  "  Blessed 
is  he  that  shall  eat  bread  in  the  kingdom  of  God."^ 

To  return  to  the  history  :  while  the  nation  was 
kept  to  its  purpose  of  a  theocracy,  a  kingdom  of 
God,  leading  towards  a  fuller  development  of  an 
everlasting  and  direct  Divine  reign,  it  was  prospered. 
As  soon  as  it  was  perverted,  under  Solomon,  to  a  mag- 
nificent earthly  kingdom,  its  dismemberment  was 
threatened,  and  under  his  son  was  executed.  Then 
all  that  larger  part  of  the  nation,  among  whom  the 
Messianic  hope  was  more  feeble,  were,  not  without 
many  prophetic  warnings  and  exhortations,  allowed 
to  be  carried  into  a  captivity  from  which  they  never 
returned.  The  smaller  remnant  were  subjected  to 
long  and  severe  discipline,  and  they,  too,  were  at  last 
carried  into  the  Babylonian  captivity,  from  which — 
after  two  generations  of  exile — only  the  more  earnest 
and  devout  part  of  them  returned. 

Soon  after  this  the  inspired  record  ceases,  but  the 
main  facts  of  the  history  are  well  known.  The 
nation  was  further  purified  by  its  terrible  struggles 
with  Antiochus  Epiphanes.     It  became  a  kingdom 

*  Luke,  xiv.  15. 


68  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

more  or  less  dependent  upon  its  stronger  neighbors, 
but  still,  as  had  been  promised,  preserving  its  au- 
tonomy until  its  everlasting  King  appeared,  then 
losing  forever  its  political  existence.  Its  genealogies 
were  preserved  until  it  was  made  sure  that  the 
Christ  was  born,  after  the  flesh,  of  David's  line,  and 
then  those  genealogies  were  so  lost  that  there  never 
again  could  be  a  recognition  of  the  fulfilment  of  the 
promise.  Their  typical  system  of  sacrifice  and  priest- 
hood, sustained  until  fulfilled  in  the  Antitype,  were 
then  overthrown  forever.  There  is  no  single  aspect 
of  its  history  which  does  not  present  the  Old  Dis- 
pensation as  preparatory  for  the  New,  as  culminating 
in  it,  and  as  passing  away  when  that  had  been  revealed. 
Turning  now  from  history  to  the  consciousness  of 
the  people,  the  same  thing  appears.  For  the  evi- 
dence of  that  consciousness  we  naturally  look  to  the 
poetry  of  the  nation,  and  here  we  find  the  expecta- 
tion of  the  fulfilment  of  the  primeval  promise  deeply 
embodied  in  the  thought  of  the  people  from  the 
earliest  song  of  the  dying  Jacob  all  down  the  ages 
of  their  history.  Jacob  looked  forward  to  the  con- 
tinuance of  Judah's  blessing  "until  Shiloh  come;"* 
and  however  modern  critics  have  thought  the  tradi- 
tional interpretation  of  this  passage  to  be  faulty,  yet 
they  must  admit  that  it  was  the  interpretation  put 
upon  it  alike  by  the  people  and  their  prophets,t  and 
embodied  in  the  Targums,  %  which  is  all  that  is  re- 
quired for  our  present  purpose.     Balaam's  prophecy, 

*  Gen.  xHx.  lo. 

f  Ezek.  xxi.  27,  admitted  to  refer  to  Gen.  xlix.  10  by  Delitzsch, 
Messianic  Prophecies,  §  9.    t  See  Targ.  Onkelos,  Jonathan,  and  Jerus. 


OLD  TESTAMENT  PREPARATORY  FOR  NEW.     69 

preserved  in  the  sacred  literature  of  the  people,  also 
admits  of  another  explanation,  but  his  declaration 
that  "  There  shall  come  a  Star  out  of  Jacob,  and  a 
sceptre  shall  arise  out  of  Israel,"^  was  in  the  popular 
apprehension,  as  shown  in  the  Targums  of  Onkelos 
and  Jonathan,  a  distinct  foretelling  of  the  Messiah. 
The  song  of  Hannah  at  the  birth  of  Samuel,  looking 
forward  to  the  universal  kingdom  of  the  Lord,  say- 
ing that  He  ''shall  exalt  the  horn  of  His  Anointed,"t 
receives  its  most  natural  explanation  in  the  same 
expectation.  Passing  on  to  the  time  of  David,  the 
psalms  ascribed  to  him  are  filled  with  the  same 
hope  that  the  great  promise  of  an  everlasting  king- 
dom should  be  fulfilled  to  his  posterity.  It  appears 
so  constantly  there  in  every  form  of  direct  prophecy 
and  of  typical  utterances,  and  as  the  underlying 
basis  of  prayer  and  thanksgiving  that  it  cannot  be 
necessary  to  refer  to  particular  instances.  But  it  is 
important  to  note  that  the  actual  Davidic  author- 
ship of  the  psalms  ascribed  to  him  is  of  no  conse- 
quence for  our  purpose.  In  fact,  the  more  these 
psalms  are  ascribed  to  many  authors,  and  the  more 
their  composition  is  ascribed  to  many  ages,  only  the 
more  widespread  and  long  continued  will  this  ex- 
pectation appear.  Beyond  this  time  the  expression 
of  this  consciousness  becomes  so  interwoven  with  ex- 
press prophecies  that  its  further  consideration  falls 
more  naturally  under  that  head.  Only  it  should  be 
remembered  that  at  the  time  of  our  Lord's  coming 
the  expectation  of  Him  was  not  confined  to  proph- 
ets and  to  such  individuals  as  Zecharias  and  Simeon 
*  Num.  xxiv.  17.  f  I  Sam.  ii.  10. 


70  THE  OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

and  Anna,  but  that  there  were  also  others  "  that 
looked  for  redemption  in  Jerusalem."^ 

When  Prophecy  comes  under  consideration  the 
only  difficulty  is  in  the  selection  from  the  abun- 
dance of  material.  I  will  refer  only  to  a  few  pas- 
sages in  which  the  temporary  character  of  the  Old 
Dispensation  and  its  absorption  in  the  New,  are  es- 
pecially set  forth. 

From  the  time  of  the  palmy  days  of  the  monarchy 
may  be  selected  the  prophecy  of  Ps.  ex.  4 :  *'  Thou 
art  a  priest  forever  after  the  order  of  Melchisedec." 
In  describing  the  Messiah  as  a  priest,  and  that  after 
another  order  than  Aaron's,  the  Psalmist  looks  for- 
ward, as  is  conclusively  shown  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,f  to  a  total  change  of  the  priesthood,  and 
hence  necessarily  of  that  whole  Dispensation  of 
which  the  priesthood  was  the  most  essential  feature. 
The  prophecies  of  Isaiah  are  too  familiar  to  need 
citation.  Yet  passing  mention  must  be  made  of  his 
declarations,  that  the  path  to  glory  of  the  Lord's 
"  Servant  "  lay  through  humiliation  and  that  He 
would  bear  vicariously  His  people's  sins.:j:  These 
things  were  so  at  variance  with  all  ideas  of  a  tem- 
poral kingdom  and  of  earthly  aggrandizement  that 
they  could  only  point  to  a  "  kingdom  not  of  this 
world,"  in  striking  contrast  to  the  expectations  of 
the  more  carnally  minded  Jews.  As  the  period  of 
the  captivity  drew  near,  the  great  prophet  of  the 
time  was  Jeremiah.  It  was  his  office  chiefly  to  fore- 
tell woe  and  disaster ;  but  through  it  all  he  looked 
forward  to  the  return,  and  beyond  it  to  that  Mes- 

*  Luke,  ii.  38.  f  Chaps,  vii.-x.  \  Isa.  lii.  13-liii.  12. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  PREPARATORY  FOR  NEW.     7 1 

sianic  restoration  of  which  the  return  from  Babylon 
was  the  preparation  and  the  type.  So  completely 
should  the  glory  of  the  Old  Dispensation  be  swal- 
lowed up  and  lost  from  sight  in  the  higher  glory  of 
the  New,  that  he  could  boldly  say  of  the  Ark,  the 
very  crown  of  all  that  was  precious  and  sacred  to 
the  Israelite,  "  In  those  days,  saith  the  LORD,  they 
shall  say  no  more,  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of  the 
Lord  :  neither  shall  it  come  to  mind  ;  neither  shall 
they  visit  it."*  So  utterly  in  the  prophet's  mind 
was  the  Old  to  be  supplanted  by  the  New.  These 
words  were  spoken  by  Jeremiah  "  in  the  days  of 
Josiah,"f  that  is,  near  the  beginning  of  his  prophetic 
activity.  Again  more  than  a  generation  later,  in 
the  reign  of  Zedekiah,  the  last  king  of  Judah,  he  de- 
clares, ''  Behold  the  days  come,  saith  the  LORD,  that 
I  will  make  a  new  covenant  with  the  house  of  Is- 
rael and  with  the  house  of  Judah:  not  according  to 
the  covenant  tfiat  I  made  with  their  fathers ;  .  .  .  . 
but  this  shall  be  the  covenant  that  I  will  make  with 
the  house  of  Israel;  after  those  days,  saith  the  LORD, 
I  will  put  my  law  in  their  inward  parts  and  write 
it  in  their  hearts,":j:  and  so  on  with  clause  after  clause, 
bringing  out  the  great  spiritual  change  which,  under 
the  New  Covenant,  should  pass  over  the  relations  ofj 
the  people  to  their  God.  It  was  with  these  words\ 
ringing  in  their  ears  that  the  Jews  passed  away  into  \ 
the  dreaded  punishment  of  the  Babylonian  captivity. 
There  two  great  prophets  were  raised  up  to  them. 
Daniel,  at  the  court  of  their  conqueror,  foresaw  the 
succession  of  world-wide  kingdoms  culminating  in 

*  Jer.  iii.  i6.  \  lb.  vs.  6.  %  lb.  xxxi.  31-34. 


^2  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

that  kingdom  of  God  which  *'  shall  stand  for  ever," 
'*  Whose  kingdom  is  an  everlasting  kingdom,  and 
all  dominions  shall  serve  and  obey  Him."  "^  This 
prophecy,  it  is  true,  blends  together  in  one  the  be- 
ginning and  the  end  of  the  New  Dispensation,  and 
takes  into  view  that  final  triumph  of  the  Messianic 
kingdom  which,  even  to  us,  is  still  future.  But  he 
was  not  left  without  commission  to  proclaim  specifi- 
cally the  beginning  and  the  date  of  the  beginning  of 
this  kingdom,  and  the  full  spiritual  fruit  it  should 
bear  in  contrast  with  the  types  of  old.  "  Seventy 
weeks  are  determined  upon  thy  people  and  thy  holy 
city,  to  finish  the  transgression,  and  to  make  an  end 
of  sins,  and  to  make  reconciliation  for  iniquity,  and 
to  bring  in  everlasting  righteousness."t 

The  other  prophet  was  Ezekiel,  among  the  cap- 
tives by  the  river  Chebar.  Parts  of  his  prophecies 
are  "  hard  to  be  understood,"  but  perfectly  clear  is 
the  Divine  promise  of  the  future  Re  proclaims  to 
the  people,  "  I  will  give  them  one  heart,  and  I  will 
put  a  new  spirit  within  you  ;  and  I  will  take  away 
the  stony  heart  out  of  their  flesh,  and  I  will  give 
them  an  heart  of  flesh  ;  that  they  may  walk  in  my 
statutes,  and  keep  mine  ordinances,  and  do  them ; 
and  they  shall  be  my  people,  and  I  will  be  their 
God."  X  Again,  at  a  later  date,  partly  in  the  same 
words,  but,  if  possible,  still  more  clearly,  he  says, 
*'  Then  will  I  sprinkle  clean  water  upon  you,  and  ye 
shall  be  clean  :  from  all  your  filthiness,  and  from  all 
your  idols  will  I  cleanse  you.  A  new  heart  also  will 
I  give  you,  and  a  new  spirit  will  I  put  within  you  : 

*  Dan.  ii.  39-45;  vii.  16-27.     f  Dan.  ix.  24.     |  Ezek.  xi.  19,  20. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  PREPARATORY  FOR  NEW.     73 

and  I  will  take  away  the  stony  heart  out  of  your 
flesh,  and  I  will  give  you  an  heart  of  flesh,  and  I  will 
put  my  Spirit  within  you,  and  cause  you  to  walk  in 
my  statutes,  and  ye  shall  keep  my  judgments  and 
do  them."  * 

The  prophets  of  the  return  are  few,  and  their 
writings  brief;  yet  each  one  of  them  speaks  upon 
the  point  under  consideration.  Haggai  and  Zecha- 
riah  were  engaged  together  in  the  effort  to  rouse  the 
sluggish  people  into  activity  in  the  rebuilding  of  the 
temple.  This  was  so  manifestly  the  work  to  which 
they  were  called  that  we  are  surprised  when  they 
pause  in  their  exhortations  to  look  forward  to  that 
which  shall  be  far  better  in  the  future  ;  yet  both  of 
them  do  this  with  unhesitating  voice.  Haggai  thus 
declares  the  divine  purpose :  "  Yet  once,  it  is  a  little 
while,  and  I  will  shake  the  heavens,  and  the  earth, 
and  the  sea,  and  the  dry  land,  and  I  will  shake  all 
nations." t  -^^^d  again:  "  I  will  shake  the  heavens 
and  the  earth ;  and  I  will  overthrow  the  throne  of 
kingdoms,  and  I  will  destroy  the  strength  of  the 
kingdoms  of  the  heathen.":]:  This  "signifieth,"  as 
may  be  seen  in  the  argument  in  the  epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  "  the  removing  of  those  things  that  are 
shaken,  as  of  things  that  are  made,  that  those  things  P 
which  cannot  be  shaken  may  remain."  §  In  Zecha-  / 
riah  the  things  of  the  future  are  largely  set  forth  by 
symbolical  actions,  but  these  actions  are  sufficiently 
explained  to  make  their  meaning  clear.  The  high- 
priest  is  clothed  in  filthy  garments  and  put  upon  his 

*  Ezek.  xxxvi.  25-27.  f  Hag.  ii.  6,  7. 

X  lb.  21,  22.  §  Heb.  xii.  27. 


\ 


74  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

trial ;  he  is  then  acquitted  and  clothed,  and  a  fair 
mitre  set  upon  his  head.  The  meaning  of  this  is  de- 
clared to  be  that  God  '*  will  bring  forth  His  Servant 
the  Branch,"  and  "  will  remove  the  iniquity  of  that 
land."*  A  little  further  on  and  the  high-priest  is 
crowned  with  a  double  crown  to  show  :  ''  Behold  the 

man  whose   name   is   the  Branch He   shall 

bear  the  glory,  and  shall  sit  and  rule  upon  His 
throne,  and  He  shall  be  a  priest  upon  His  throne."  f 
Such  union  of  regal  and  f  riestly  authority  implied  a 
revolution  in  the  arrangements  of  the  Old  Dispensa- 
tion, and  was  to  be  accomplished  in  that  coming 
One  whose  title,  ''  the  Branch,"  had  already  been 
recognized  in  the  older  prophets.  In  the  following 
chapters  the  change  from  the  Old  to  the  New  cove- 
nant is  described  as  so  great  that  the  accustomed 
fasts  of  the  former  shall  be  changed  to  "joy  and 
gladness  and  cheerful  feasts."  %  Then  Zion  is  told 
to  "  Rejoice  greatly,"  for  "  Behold,  thy  king  cometh 
unto  thee  :  He  is  just,  and  having  salvation  ;  lowly, 
and  riding  upon  an  ass."§  In  that  day  a  great 
change  is  to  pass  over  the  people,  "  and  he  that  is 
feeble  among  them  at  that  day  shall  be  as  David ; 
and  the  house  of  David  shall  be  as  God  ;"  and  then 
shall  be  poured  upon  them  "the  spirit  of  grace  and 
of  supplications,  and  they  shall  look  upon  Me  whom 
they  have  pierced."  ||  In  the  closing  chapter  of  his 
prophecy,  in  figures  strikingly  like  those  of  his  pre- 
decessors, Joel  and  Ezekiel,  he  describes  the  great 
changes  which  must  come  over  the  Old  Dispensa- 

*  Zech.  iii.  3-5,  8,  9.  \  lb.  vi.  II,  13. 

X  lb.  vii.,  viii.  19.  §  lb.  ix.  9.  ||  lb.  x.  8,  10. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  PREPARATORY  FOR  NEW      75 

tion  to  transform  it  into  the  New,  when  "  the  LORD 
shall  be  King  over  all  the  earth,"  and  everything, 
even  the  meanest,  shall  be  "holiness  unto  the 
Lord."* 

Malachi,  the  last  of  the  prophets,  and  separated 
from  those  nearest  to  him  by  about  three-quarters 
of  a  century,  takes  up  the  same  strain.  He  declares 
that  the  New  Covenant  shall  burst  the  narrow  bounds 
of  the  old  Jewish  nationality,  and  "from  the  rising 
of  the  sun  even  unto  the  going  down  of  the  same  my 
name  shall  be  great  among  the  Gentiles."  f  He  de- 
scribes the  great  purification  which  must  be  effected,:]: 
and  the  coming  of  "  the  Sun  of  righteousness  with 
healing  in  his  wings ; "  and  promises  that  a  forerun- 
ner shall  be  sent  to  prepare  men  for  "  the  coming  of 
the  great  and  dreadful  day  of  the  LORD."§ 

Thus,  whether  one  looks  at  the  circumstances  and 
promises  connected  with  the  calling  of  Israel,  at  its 
history,  at  the  consciousness  of  the  devout  among 
its  people,  or  at  the  express  declarations  of  its  proph- 
ets, he  sees  in  all  the  same  thing.  The  Old  Dis- 
pensation was  designed  to  prepare  the  way  for  the 
New.  It  was  understood  to  be  temporary,  and  to 
seek  its  consummation  in  the  coming  kingdom  of 
the  Messiah.  In  everything  it  looked  forward  to  the 
future. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  say  how  constantly  the  same 
view  of  the  relation  between  the  Old  and  the  New 
is  expressed  in  the  latter.  It  is  not  a  relation  of  con- 
trariety, but  of  designed   development ;   not  of  de- 

*  Zech.  xiv.  9,  20,  21.  f  Mai.  i.  11. 

X  lb.  iii.  2,  3.  §  lb.  iv.  2,  5. 


7^  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS, 

struction,  but  of  fulfilment.  "  Old  things  are  passed 
away;  behold,  all  things  are  become  new;"*  but  it 
is  by  the  bringing  in  of  '' a  better  hope"  which  had 
been  in  view  from  the  outset. 

Another  feature  of  the  relation  between  the  two 
Covenants  grows  out  of  that  which  has  just  been 
considered,  and  should  never  be  lost  sight  of  in  con- 
nection with  it.  Christianity  was  a  New  Covenant, 
and  a  Covenant  embracing  in  its  scope  all  mankind  ; 
yet  it  was  made  with  God's  people  of  old.  This  was 
the  often-repeated  promise  in  the  time  of  the  tem- 
porary Dispensation  ;  and  this  was  constantly  recog- 
nized by  the  teachers  of  that  which  came  in  its 
place.  It  was  on  David's  throne  that  David's 
descendant  should  sit.f  "  Out  of  Zion  shall  go  forth 
the  law,  and  the  word  of  the  law  from  Jerusalem.  "  % 
The  Lord  promised  that  He  would  make  His  new 
covenant  "  with  the  house  of  Israel,  and  with  the 
house  of  Judah."  §  And  so  throughout  the  promises 
and  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament.  Israel  was 
God's  chosen  people,  and  the  very  object  of  their 
choice  was  that  they  might  be  the  depositary  of 
His  promises,  and  the  channel  through  which  His 
redemption  should  be  given  to  mankind.  Corre- 
spondingly, the  Gospel  opens  with  tracing  back  to 
Abraham  the  genealogy  of  Christ.]  When  He 
came  He  was  hailed  with  hosannas  as  ''  the  son  of 
David."  Tf     He  taught  the  woman  of  Samaria  that 


*  2  Cor.  V.  17. 

t  2  Sam.  vii.  13-16  ;  Ps.  Ixxxix.  3,  4  ;  cxxxii,  11,  etc. 

X  Isa.  ii.  3  ;  Mic.  iv.  2,  etc.  §  Jer.  xxxi.  31.  ||  Matt. 

1  Matt.  xxi.  9  ;    ix.  27  ;    xv.  22  ;   xx.  30,  31;    xxii.  42,  etc. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  PREPARATORY  FOR  NEW.     77 

*'  salvation  is  of  the  Jews,"  *  and  told  His  disciples 
that,  so  far  as  His  immediate  mission  was  concerned, 
**  I  am  not  sent  but  unto  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house 
of  Israel."  f  When  He  chose  His  twelve  Apostles 
and  sent  them  forth,  it  was  with  the  command,  "  Go 
not  into  the  way  of  the  Gentiles,  and  into  any  city 
of  the  Samaritans  enter  ye  not ;  but  go  rather  to 
the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel."  :j:  Even 
after  His  resurrection,  when  such  restrictions  were 
removed  and  He  had  given  them  the  broadest 
charge,  "  Go  ye  into  all  the  world  and  preach  the 
Gospel  to  every  creature,"  §  they  could  so  little 
understand  His  meaning,  they  were  so  convinced 
that  the  Gospel  must  first  be  spoken  to  the  Jews,|| 
that  for  years  they  went  about,  "  scattered  abroad  " 
by  persecution,  ''preaching  the  word  to  none  but 
unto  the  Jews  only."  Tf  After  the  Divine  promise 
had  been  evidently  fulfilled,  after  the  Church  had 
been  founded  and  organized,  and  the  New  Covenant 
had  been  established  with  the  believers  among  the 
people  chosen  of  old,  came  the  vision  to  Cornelius 
and  to  St.  Peter,  ^^  by  which  the  admission  of  the 
Gentiles  to  the  already  established  Covenant  was 
proclaimed.  Even  after  this,  it  was  still  a  consider- 
able time  before  the  Gospel  was  freely  preached  to 
them,  and  when  it  was,  and  great  numbers  believed, 
it  was  only  as  the  result  of  a  solemn  council  held  at 
Jerusalem  that  the  Gentiles  were  declared  exempt 
from  the  observance  of  the  ceremonial  Mosaic  law. 
In  the  very  act  of  making  this  declaration  St.  James 

*  John,  iv.  22.  t  Matt.  xv.  24.  %  Matt.  x.  5. 

§  Mark,  xvi.  15.     f  Acts,  xiii.  46.     ^  Acts,  xi.  19.      **  Acts,  x. 


78  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

declared  to  the  council  that  this  admission  of  the 
Gentiles  was  in  accordance  with  "  the  words  of  the 
Prophets,"  and  in  fulfilment  of  the  promise  of  God's 
new  covenant  with  His  people,  and  he  applies  to  it 
the  prophecy  of  Amos,*  ''  After  this  I  will  return, 
and  will  build  again  the  tabernacle  of  David  which 
is  fallen  down  ;  and  I  will  build  the  ruins  thereof, 
and  I  will  set  it  up  :  that  the  residue  of  men  might 
seek  after  the  Lord,  and  all  the  Gentiles,  upon 
whom  My  name  is  called."  f  Soon  after  the  Gen- 
tiles far  outnumbered  the  Jews  in  the  Church,  and 
there  arose  the  danger,  then  as  now,  that  men  might 
think  the  Gospel  an  altogether  new  revelation,  un- 
connected with  that  which  had  gone  before.  This 
led  to  the  masterly  argument  of  St.  Paul  in  his 
Epistle  to  the  Romans,  %  in  which  he  shows  that 
*'  God  hath  not  cast  away  His  people  whom  He  fore- 
knew; "  but  that  their  partial  and  temporary  rejection 
for  their  unbelief  was  in  accordance  with  His  deal- 
ings with  them  all  along  the  course  of  their  history, 
and  that  His  promise  was  fulfilled  through  that 
remnant  who  had  accepted  His  offered  salvation. 

Thus  from  whatever  point  the  Old  and  the  New 
Covenants  are  examined,  it  is  seen  that  the  New 
was  cradled  in  the  Old,  and  sprang  out  of  it  by  a 
long  designed  and  Divine  evolution  ;  but  it  is  always 
to  be  remembered  that  the  Old,  though  fulfilled 
with  the  coming  in  of  the  New,  has  not  lost  its  value. 
Its  lessons  still  remain  for  our  instruction.  Still  to 
us,  as  to  the  Romans,  the  Corinthians,  or  the  Gala- 
tians  of  the  first  century,  the  teaching  of  the  Gospel 

*  Amos,  ix.  II,  12.         f  Acts,  xv.  i6,  17.         %  Rom.  ix.-xi. 


OLD    TESTAMENT  PREPARATORY  FOR  NEW.     79 

plants  itself  upon  the  teaching  of  the  Scriptures 
that  went  before,  and  to  appreciate  the  force  of  the 
reasoning  of  our  Lord  and  of  His  Apostles  we  need 
to  understand  the  facts,  the  institutions  and  the 
laws  upon  which  that  reasoning  is  founded.  As  the 
chosen  people  were  gradually  fitted  for  the  new 
Covenant  by  their  law,  their  prophecies,  and  the  ex- 
periences of  their  history,  so  must  our  minds  still 
be  prepared  to  understand  the  Gospel  revelation  by 
the  study  of  that  which  went  before.  In  the  Prov- 
idence of  God  the  two  have  been  indissolubly 
joined  together  as  the  parts  of  one  great  work  for 
the  salvation  of  man  in  the  restoration  of  his  lost 
holiness  and  communion  with  God  ;  and  although 
the  latest  revelation  may  alone  suffice  to  the  humble 
seeker  after  truth,  yet  he  can  only  understand  its 
reasonableness  and  fully  enter  into  its  force  through 
a  knowledge  of  those  earlier  revelations  which  pre- 
pared its  way. 

The  teaching  of  the  Old  Dispensation  has  natu- 
rally been  considered  as  embodied,  at  least  in  its 
practical  effects,  in  the  lives  of  its  heroes  ;  and  it  is 
urged  that  these  not  only  fell  far  below  the  Gospel 
standard,  but  that,  acting  it  is  said  under  the  im- 
pulse of  **  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord,"  they  did  very 
abominable  things,  and  were  praised  by  the  highest 
religious  authority  of  the  times  for  acts  which  are 
abhorrent  to  the  Christian.  It  were  too  long  to 
discuss  each  particular  case ;  it  is  only  possible  to 
select  those  which  have  occasioned  the  greatest 
difficulty,  and  have  been  thought  to  array  the  mo- 
rality of  the  Old  Testament  in  opposition  to  that 


8o  THE   OLD  AND   NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

of  the  New.  As  examples,  therefore,  may  be  taken 
the  deceit  practised  by  Abraham  in  regard  to  Sarah, 
the  stratagem  by  which  Jacob  obtained  the  birth- 
right of  his  brother,  the  conduct  of  some  of  the 
Judges,  and  the  horrible  sins  of  David,  the  ''man 
after  God's  own  heart."  The  principles  involved 
in  the  discussion  of  these  will  apply  to  all  other 
instances. 

But  while  discussing  the  lives  of  particular  men, 
the  general  method  of  the  Divine  dealing  with  all 
men  needs  to  be  kept  in  mind.  It  is  not  in  accord- 
ance with  the  plan  of  Infinite  wisdom  and  love  to 
make  men  holy  by  an  act  of  Almighty  power.  All 
grace  is  indeed  from  God  ;  every  good  thought  and 
holy  inspiration  is  from  His  Spirit.  But  His  method 
is  that  of  education,  not  of  compulsion.  He  takes 
men  as  they  are,  puts  new  motives  and  desires  into 
their  hearts,  and  helps  their  weak  endeavors  to  draw 
near  to  Himself ;  but  He  does  not  destroy  their 
own  responsibility,  or  lift  them  bodily  into  a  higher 
state  without  their  own  exertion.  Consequently  we 
must  expect  to  find  in  the  saints  of  any  period  the 
knowledge,  the  ideas  and  the  customs  of  that  period 
as  the  groundwork  of  their  lives ;  and  from  this 
they  rise,  not  altogether  and  at  a  bound,  but  little 
by  little,  as  far  as  they  are  enabled  by  God's  grace 
to  receive  and  act  upon  the  higher  spiritual  ideas 
obtained  by  the  closeness  of  their  communion  with 
Him. 

The  leading  characteristic  of  Abraham  was  faith 
in  God,  and  it  was  expressly  on  this  ground  that  he 
was  rewarded  and  blessed.     His  sin  in  the  case  of  his 


OLD   TESTAMENT  PREPARATORY  FOR  NEW.     8 1 

dealings  both  with  Pharaoh*  and  with  Abimelech,f 
consisted  in  a  failure  of  trust  in  God  under  circum- 
stances of  apparent  danger,  and  a  resort  to  equivo- 
cation as  a  means  of  safety.  The  sin,  in  any  other 
man  of  those  times,  would  pass  almost  unnoticed ; 
in  Abraham's  case  it  was  exposed,  and  he  was  put 
to  shame.  The  difificulty  alleged  is  that  he  was  left 
unpunished  while  the  innocent  monarch  against 
whom  he  had  offended  suffered,  and  was  reproved 
for  his  sake.  This  statement  of  the  case  is  not  ac- 
curate. It  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  Abraham 
himself  did  not  suffer  for  his  sin  in  the  exposure 
and  shame,  and  in  being  driven  forth  again  to  his 
nomadic  life ;  while  the  penalties  inflicted  on  Pha- 
raoh and  on  Abimelech  were  not  of  the  nature  of 
punishments  but  of  warning,  and  for  the  protection 
of  one  in  training  to  become  the  father  of  the 
chosen  people.  What  was  done  to  them  was  simply 
to  prevent  their  coming  athwart  the  Divine  plan  for 
the  salvation  of  man,  now  beginning  to  be  devel- 
oped. It  is  a  perversion  of  the  story  to  represent  it 
as  the  reward  of  the  guilty  and  the  punishment  of 
the  innocent.  It  was  really  a  dealing  gently  with, 
though  still  punishing,  the  occasional  fall  of  a  pure 
and  noble  man,  and  the  bringing  of  sufficient  press- 
ure to  bear  upon  those  who  were  unconsciously 
committing  a  great  wrong,  to  show  them  the  danger 
in  which  they  stood,  and  force  them  to  respect  the 
bearer  of  a  Divine  commission,  though  overtaken,  at 
the  moment,  in  a  fault. 

Neither  in  the  case  of  Abraham,  nor  in  that  of 

*  Gen.  xii.  12.  t  ^^'  ^^'  ^' 


82  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

Jacob  and  the  others  which  follow,  does  the  Script- 
ure narrative  expressly  state  that  the  sufferings 
which  followed  the  sins  were  the  punishment  for 
their  commission.  It  simply  narrates  the  facts  as 
they  occurred,  leaving  the  moral  to  the  intelligence 
of  the  reader.  The  punishments  themselves,  like 
most  of  those  which  follow  wrong-doing  in  our  own 
day,  were  for  the  most  part  of  the  nature  of  what  we 
call  "natural  consequences"  of  evil;  that  is,  they 
were  consequences  which  came  about  under  the  im- 
mutable moral  laws  which  God  has  ordained,  and 
which  show  Him  to  be  always,  under  all  dispen- 
sations alike,  the  righteous  Governor,  not  of  one 
people,  but  of  all  the  world. 

Of  Jacob's  sin  we  have  a  much  fuller  account,  and 
therefore  the  explanation  is  correspondingly  easier. 
The  birthright  had  been  promised  to  him  before  he 
was  born.  His  brother,  in  a  bargain  concluded  with 
characteristic  impulsiveness,  had  formally  conveyed 
it  to  him  and  sealed  the  conveyance  with  an  oath.* 
It  is  quite  unnecessary  to  defend  Jacob  in  the  mak- 
ing of  this  bargain;  the  transaction  is  simply  re- 
corded in  the  narrative  without  comment.  Only 
it  is  to  be  noted  that  by  it  Esau  was  absolutely 
estopped  from  claiming  the  blessing  which  he  after- 
wards tried  to  gain.  But,  apart  from  this,  it  was 
certain  from  the  beginning  that  if  God's  words  were 
true  Jacob  must  become  the  heir  of  the  promise 
made  to  his  fathers ;  but  Rebecca  would  not  wait 
for  the  vindication  of  God's  faithfulness.  She  con- 
trived a  way  to  secure  the  coveted  blessing  by  a 

*  Gen.  XXV.  33. 


OLD  TESTAMENT  PREPARATORY  FOR  NEW.     83 

miserable  fraud,  and  Jacob  weakly  yielded  to  her 
commands.  The  consequence  to  her  was  a  life-long 
separation  from  her  favorite  son  ;  to  him,  exile  from 
home,  the  wrath  of  his  brother,  danger  of  his  life, 
and  all  the  woes  of  the  following  forty  years.  He 
was  certainly  severely  punished  for  his  sin,  and  if 
that  sin  was  allowed  to  be  the  means  of  securing  his 
father's  prophetic  blessing,  it  was  but  what  is  con- 
tinually seen  in  the  world,  where  God  overrules 
human  wrong  to  the  furtherance  of  His  own  pur- 
poses. The  sin  was  punished ;  the  blessing  was 
given  through  the  sin  but  not  because  of  it.  It  had 
been  promised  from  the  first,  and  would  certainly 
have  been  secured  to  Jacob  without  the  punishment 
had  the  sin  not  intervened.  The  blessing,  indeed, 
far  outweighed  the  punishment,  and  there  is  some- 
thing repugnant  to  our  ideas  in  the  bestowal  of  such 
a  blessing  on  the  occasion  of  such  a  sin ;  but  this  is 
because  of  the  great  advance  in  all  our  spiritual  con- 
ceptions brought  about  by  the  progress  of  revelation 
since  Jacob's  time.  Take  the  book  of  Genesis  as 
the  sole  measure  of  religious  knowledge,  imagine 
ourselves  with  no  ideas  of  right  beyond  those  which 
nature  supplies,  and  which  might  be  gathered  from 
that  book,  and  it  will  be  plain  that  He  who  sees  the 
heart  might  justly  overlook  much  which  we  have 
been  taught  to  recognize  as  very  evil,  and  so  might 
reward  that  striving  to  draw  near  to  God  which  was 
so  far  in  advance  of  the  mass  of  Jacob's  contempo- 
raries. 

In  times  of  Israel's  great  need  and  suffering  for 
their  unfaithfulness,  the  Judges  were  raised  up  by 


84  THE  OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS, 

the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  to  deliver  His  people  from 
their  oppressors.  We  are  not  to  think  of  them  as 
prompted  by  the  Spirit  to  the  performance  of  each 
particular  act  recorded  of  them,  but  only  as  roused 
to  the  deliverance  of  their  people,  and  selecting  such 
means  as  seemed  good  to  their  own  human  judg- 
ment guided  by  such  religious  knowledge  as  they 
had.  There  are  surely  too  many  instances  all 
around  us  of  earnestly  religious  men  and  women 
using  most  injudicious  and  sometimes  questionable 
means  for  the  accomplishment  of  their  purposes,  to 
allow  us  to  suppose  that  the  choice  of  those  means 
is  determined  by  the  Spirit  who  animates  those  who 
use  them.  There  are  too  many  instances  of  sin  and 
wrong  among  those  of  a  generally  holy  life  to  sup- 
pose that  each  and  every  act  of  a  true  believer  in 
God  is  necessarily  in  accordance  with  God's  will. 
What  happens  now,  happened  also  then.  The 
Judges  were  animated  from  on  high  by  a  pure  and 
noble  purpose ;  they  chose  the  means  for  its  accom- 
plishment under  such  knowledge  of  right  and  wrong 
as  they  could  have  in  those  early  days,  and  with 
such  feeble  adherence  even  to  these  ideas  of  right  as 
belonged  to  untrained  spiritual  children.  Their  acts 
were  often  wrong  when  they  did  not  know  it,  and 
Ehud's  assassination  of  Eglon,*  and  Gideon's  cru- 
elty to  the  men  of  Succoth  and  Penuel,f  doubtless 
may  have  been  done  with  a  clear  conscience.  Yet 
there  was  a  marked  difference  in  the  Divine  blessing 
upon  the  works  of  the  various  Judges  as  well  as  in 
the   results    effected   by   them.      The   sensual    and 

*Judg.  iii.  18-23.  \^^'  viii.  13-17- 


OLD    TESTAMENT  PREPARATORY  FOR  NEW,     85 

pleasure-loving  Samson  worried  and  annoyed  the 
Philistines  and  inflicted  many  injuries  upon  them ; 
but  for  all  his  mighty  strength  Israel  was  scarcely 
the  better  for  his  life,  nor  was  the  supremacy  of 
their  enemies  broken  by  all  he  did.  On  the  other 
hand,  his  contemporary  Samuel,  by  his  devout  life, 
by  his  unwavering  trust  in  God  and  devotion  to  His 
will,  brought  the  nation  to  an  unwonted  state  of 
prosperity,  and  prepared  the  way  for  the  reigns 
of  David  and  Solomon.  Then,  as  now,  character 
formed  upon  a  close  adherence  to  what  was  known 
of  the  Divine  will,  was  a  more  important  factor  than 
any  outward  gifts.  In  those  times  of  ignorance 
men  were  dealt  with  gently,  for  responsibility  is 
ever  proportioned  to  knowledge ;  but  still  the  high- 
est standard  attained  was  the  most  abundantly 
blessed.  There  was  much  also  done  in  accordance 
with  the  ordinary  customs  of  the  times,  which  seems 
to  us  harsh  and  cruel,  but  which  did  not  then  seem 
so  either  to  those  who  did,  or  to  those  who  suffered, 
these  things.  When  Joshua  made  "  the  captains  of 
the  men  of  war  "  put  their  feet  upon  the  necks  of  the 
captive  kings  before  he  slew  them,*  he  only  followed 
the  ordinary  custom  of  war,  and  impressed  his  cap- 
tains with  a  vivid  sense  of  the  weakness  of  their 
foes,  treating  them  as  he  would  have  been  treated  by 
them.  When  his  successors  cut  off  "  the  thumbs  and 
the  great  toes  "  of  Adoni-bezek,  they  only  did  what 
Adoni-bezek  claimed  to  have  himself  done  to  '*  three- 
score and  ten  kings."t  These  things  show  how  greatly 
our  moral  ideas  have  been  elevated  by  the  progress 

*Josh.  X.  24.  t  Judg.  i.  6,  7. 


86  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

of  revelation  ;  but  they  show  no  other  opposition 
between  tiie  Old  and  the  New  Dispensations  than 
that  which  must  of  necessity  always  exist  between 
the  less  and  the  more  perfect.  The  Divine  will  was 
always  the  same ;  but  men,  both  then  and  now,  are 
mercifully  judged  according  to  their  opportunities 
of  knowing  that  will. 

There  is  one  case  of  which  these  considerations 
do  not  at  first  sight  seem  a  sufficient  explanation — 
Jael  treacherously  assassinated  Sisera  under  the 
cloak  of  proffered  hospitality.  *  In  the  song  of  the 
prophetess  Deborah  she  is  praised  for  this  act  as 
"  blessed  above  women,"  and  the  details  of  the 
treachery  and  murder  are  especially  enumerated,  f 
The  difficulty  here  is  not  so  much  with  the  act  itself, 
which  may  readily  be  explained  on  the  same  prin- 
ciples with  those  already  discussed,  as  with  this 
commendation  of  it  in  all  its  detail.  The  suggestion 
is  worse  than  useless  that  Deborah  was  not  here 
speaking  under  the  guidance  of  inspiration  ;  for  she 
was  the  chosen  Prophetess  of  Israel,  and  uttered 
this  song  officially,  and  it  is  recorded  in  the  sacred 
books  without  any  intimation  of  disapproval.  If  it 
is  not  to  be  received  as  inspired,  it  would  be  difficult 
to  determine  on  any  reliable  marks  of  inspiration  for 
a  large  part  of  the  Old  Testament  canon.  The  true 
explanation  is  undoubtedly  that  Deborah  rightly 
commends  Jael  for  her  zeal  on  behalf  of  God's  peo- 
ple at  great  personal  risk  to  herself ;  and  she  speaks 
of  the  means  used  simply  as  the  ordinary  means  of 
the  time,  neither  she  nor  Jael  having  any  conscious- 

*  Judg.  iv.  1 8-2 1.  f  lb.  V.  24-27. 


OLD    TESTAMENT  PREPARA  TOR  V  TOR  NE  W.     8/ 

ness  of  their  inherent  wickedness.  Constantine  may- 
have  been  guilty  of  great  error  and  wrong  in  inter- 
locking the  church  with  the  state;  but  we  never- 
theless commend  his  act,  because,  in  his  position 
and  with  his  knowledge,  it  was  a  great  and  noble 
deed  in  behalf  of  truth  and  purity;  and  so  far  as  his 
motives  may  have  been  right,  we  feel  sure  that  he 
was  commended  above.  So  Jael  did  what  was  in 
her  eyes  a  most  brave  and  noble  deed  for  God  ;  and 
Deborah  commended  it  ;  but  it  does  not  follow  that 
the  deed  itself  is  to  be  looked  upon  otherwise  than 
with  abhorrence  from  the  standard  of  a  higher  knowl- 
edge. Fearful  indeed  would  be  the  condition  of 
man  if  he  could  obtain  his  heavenly  Father's  ap- 
proval only  when  he  rises  above  his  knowledge  of 
the  Divine  will.  God  commends  and  blesses  us 
when,  like  Jael,  we  bravely  do  and  dare  on  His 
behalf  according  to  the  light  He  has  given  us ; 
and  such  efforts,  however  mistaken  in  themselves, 
must  always  meet  the  approval  of  His  prophets. 

David  lived  some  centuries  later,  and  is  shown  by 
his  life  and  his  writings  to  have  had  far  higher  and 
clearer  knowledge  of  the  truth.  The  one  character- 
istic of  his  life  was  an  earnest  desire  to  submit  him- 
self in  all  things  to  God's  will  and  to  be  wholly  guided 
thereby  in  all  the  affairs  of  life.  But  he  was  a  man 
of  strong  natural  passions  and  of  excessive  family 
affection.  He  was  raised  from  being  an  obscure 
shepherd  boy  to  the  throne  of  Israel.  He  was  a 
bold  and  successful  warrior  in  a  rude  and  barbarous 
age ;  a  wise  governor  under  most  difficult  circum- 
stances ;   and  a  great  statesman  when  his  own  peo- 


88  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

pie  were  disunited,  and  all  the  nations  around 
bitterly  hostile.  His  later  life  is  checkered  with 
fearful  sins — sins  not  only  against  the  standard  of 
Christian  morality,  but  which  were  flagrant  and 
outrageous  even  according  to  the  standard  of  his 
own  time.  Two  remarks  are  here  to  be  made  :  in 
the  first  place,  David  was  long  and  severely  pun- 
ished for  his  sin.  Not  only  was  the  child  of  his 
guilty  passion  taken  from  him,  but  from  that  time 
forth  to  the  end  of  his  life  he  was  under  a  cloud  of 
sore  domestic  afflictions,  and  all  the  woes  denounced 
by  the  prophet  Nathan  "*  fell  upon  him  in  full  force. 
The  Divine  displeasure  was  both  pronounced  in 
word  and  carried  out  in  deed.  In  the  second  place, 
the  depth  of  his  repentance,  when  his  sin  was 
brought  home  to  him,  was  proportioned  to  the  enor- 
mity of  his  guilt.  The  annals  of  literature  furnish 
no  more  deep  and  true  outpouring  of  a  penitent 
heart  than  is  given  in  the  fifty-first  Psalm.  If  the 
Christian  be  overtaken  by  a  fault  as  great  in  him, 
with  his  higher  knowledge  and  fuller  privilege,  as 
David's  was  in  his  time  and  under  his  circumstances, 
he  can  express  hia-sorrow  and  humiliation  before 
God  in  no  better  language  than  that  which  David 
has  supplied.  Whether,  therefore,  we  look  at  the 
manifestation  of  the  Divine  abhorrence  of  sin,  or  at 
the  repentance  for  its  commission,  the  case  of  David 
makes  no  jar  in  the  moral  unity  of  the  two  dispen- 
sations. There  was  vast  progress  in  the  knowledge 
of  the  Divine  will  from  the  one  to  the  other ;  but  that 
will  itself  was  always  unchangeably  the  same. 

*  2  Sam.  xii.  ii,  12. 


OLD    TESTAMENT  PREPARATORY  FOR  NEW.     89 

The  general  relation  of  the  Old  Dispensation  to 
the  New,  as  shown  in  the  conduct  of  its  heroes,  is  the 
same  as  seen  in  every  other  aspect.  In  both  is  the 
same  righteous  God  ever  leading  man,  as  he  is  able 
to  bear,  towards  His  own  infinite  holiness  ;  but  ever 
dealing  with  him  according  to  his  spiritual  capacity 
and  knowledge.  From  Jacob  or  Deborah  to  our 
own  day  there  has  been  a  vast  progress  in  the 
knowledge  of  the  Divine  will,  and  consequently  in 
the  embodiment  of  that  knowledge  in  action  ;  but 
so  far  is  the  highest  present  standard  below  the  in- 
finite holiness  of  God,  that  in  a  future  state,  when 
we  "  shall  know  even  as  we  are  known,"  it  may  be 
more  surprising  to  us  that  the  Holy  Spirit  could 
dwell  in  us  and  help  us  as  we  are  now,  than  it  now 
seems  to  us  that  He  could  have  loved  and  borne  with 
those  who  were  the  best  examples  of  virtue  in  the 
days  of  old. 


LECTURE  IV. 

THE  RELATION  OF  THE  PRECEPTS   OF  THE  LAW  TO 
THE  GOSPEL. 

The  general  relation  of  the  Old  Dispensation  to 
the  New  having  been  discussed  in  the  last  lecture, 
and  the  conduct  of  its  heroes  examined  in  the  light 
of  Christian  morality,  it  remains  to  speak  of  the  re- 
lation of  certain  definite  precepts  of  the  Law  to  the 
Gospel. 

This  relation  is  set  forth  in  a  summary  but  com- 
prehensive way  in  St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Gala- 
tians.  He  shows  that,  "  The  Scripture.  .  .  .  preached 
the  Gospel  before  unto  Abraham,"  that  the  law 
"was  added  because  of  transgressions,"  that  "if 
there  had  been  a  law  given  which  could  have  given 
life,  verily  righteousness  should  have  been  by  the 
law,"  and  that  "  the  law  was  our  schoolmaster  to 
bring  us  to  Christ."  The  essential  points  of  this 
teaching  have  already  been  called  to  mind  in  the 
earlier  lectures  :  that  the  principle  of  man's  accept- 
ance with  God  through  trust  in  Him,  was  already 
made  known  before  the  giving  of  the  law ;  and  that 
the  law  was  added  because  man  required  a  pre- 
paratory training  before  he  could  become  fit  for  the 
full  reception  of  this  principle.  The  most  impor- 
tant elements  of  that  training  in  the  institution  of 
the  priesthood  and  the  sacrificial  system  must  be 


RELATION  OF  PRECEPTS  OF  LAW  TO   GOSPEL.    9 1 

reserved  for  future  consideration.  At  present  some 
of  the  detailed  precepts  of  the  law,  as  examples  of 
the  whole,  are  to  be  considered,  and  their  relation 
to  the  Gospel  examined. 

These  precepts  may  be  arranged,  for  convenience, 
in  several  classes,  as  national,  educational,  typical, 
and  directly  preparatory.  Such  classes,  however, 
cannot  be  kept  distinct  from  one  another,  but  will 
be  found  to  overlap  and  intermingle.  Any  single 
precept,  with  that  multiformity  of  purpose  which 
characterizes  all  the  Divine  works,  may  belong  to 
more  than  one  class,  sometimes  even  to  all  of  them. 
Still  it  is  only  by  means  of  some  such  classification, 
however  imperfect,  that  the  different  relations  be- 
tween them  and  the  Gospel  can  be  conveniently 
considered. 

The  examination  may  be  begun  with  that  class 
which  seems  at  first  sight  most  diametrically  op- 
posed to  the  Gospel,  the  precepts  given  to  promote 
national  separation  and  exclusiveness;  and  first,  of 
those  relating  to  food.  That  these  precepts  were 
national  and  given  for  the  especial  purpose  of  sep- 
arating the  Israelites  from  other  nations  needs  no 
argument.  No  such  distinctions  were  recognized  in 
the  original  gift  to  Noah,  ''  Every  moving  thing  that 
liveth  shall  be  meat  for  you  ;  even  as  the  green  herb 
have  I  given  you  all  things;""^  and  it  was  deter- 
mined by  the  Council  at  Jerusalem  that  they  were 
no  longer  obligatory  on  the  Gentile  converts,  f 
Further,  it  is  plain  that,  however  they  may  have 
sprung  from,  they  were  not  limited  and  determined 
*  Gen.  ix,  3.  f  Acts,  xv.  28,  29. 


92  THE  OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

by  the  use  of  animals  in  sacrifice,  since  a  large 
number,  as  notably  the  roebuck  and  hart,  several 
kinds  of  birds  and  fishes,  and  many  of  other  orders, 
were  allowed  for  food  which  were  not  permissible  in 
sacrifice.  *  But  the  point  not  always  sufficiently 
observed  is  the  extent  to  which  these  laws  inter- 
fered with  any  intimate  social  intercourse  between 
the  Israelites  and  other  nations.  It  was  just  such 
an  interference  as  that  which  must  always  arise 
between  a  people  enjoying  with  a  good  conscience 
perfect  freedom  in  regard  to  food,  and  one  hedged 
about  on  every  side  by  very  peculiar  and  apparently 
arbitrary  enactments.  Difficulties  in  their  inter- 
course will  continually  arise  in  the  most  unlooked- 
for  way  and  on  the  most  unexpected  occasions. 
The  fact  may  be  illustrated  in  modern  times  by  the 
indignation  of  the  Sepoys  in  India  at  the  idea  of 
being  called  upon  in  the  ordinary  round  of  military 
duty  to  use  cartridges  prepared  with  animal  fat. 
In  ancient  times  Daniel  and  his  companions  pre- 
ferred to  restrict  themselves  to  an  exclusively  vege- 
table diet  rather  than  incur  the  risk  of  defilement  by 
eating  of  the  royal  food  of  Nebuchadnezzar.f  No 
Hebrew  could  sit  at  the  table  of  a  foreigner  without 
danger  of  finding  forbidden  kinds  of  fish  and  flesh 
and  fowl  set  before  him.  Even  those  which  were 
allowed  would  probably  have  been  killed  in  an  un- 
lawful way,  and  the  whole  food  prepared  with  in- 
gredients, or  with  the  neglect  of  precautions,  which 
would  make  his  participation  a  violation  of  the  law. 
In  consequence  no  Hebrew  could  safely  become  a 
*  See  Lev.  xi. ;  Deut.  xiv.  \  Dan.  i.  8-16, 


RELATION  OF  PRECEPTS  OF  LA  W  TO  GOSPEL.   93 

guest  at  a  Gentile  table,  and  a  great  restriction  was 
thus  imposed  on  all  social  intercourse. 

The  bar  thus  formed  was  more  than  doubled  by 
the  laws  of  defilement  and  purification.  The  thirsty- 
Hebrew  traveller  might  not  knock  at  the  door  of  a 
stranger  without  fear  that  the  vessel  of  water  had 
become  defiled  and  defiling  by  the  accidental  falling 
into  it  of  the  dead  body  of  a  fly  or  some  other  in- 
sect. *  Some  defilements  rendered  not  only  the  per- 
sons immediately  affected  unclean,  but  every  bed  on 
which  they  rested,  every  saddle  on  which  they  rode, 
every  seat  on  which  they  sat,  communicated  defile- 
ment to  whoever  touched  them,  f  How  could  the 
Israelite,  if  he  mingled  with  those  who  had  no 
knowledge  of  such  laws,  be  sure  that  he  might  not 
at  any  moment  unconsciously  incur  defilement  ?  His 
only  safety  must  be  in  holding  himself  aloof  from 
the  heathen  altogether.  The  laws  of  defilement  were 
extremely  intricate,  and  interwoven  with  all  the 
affairs  of  the  daily  life.  If  the  dead  body  of  any 
creeping  thing,  fell  upon  "  any  vessel  of  wood,  or 
raiment,  or  skin,  or  sack,"  it  must  be  put  into  water, 
and  any  meat  upon  which  this  water  might  fall  was 
unclean,  and  any  earthen  vessel  into  which  such 
body  fell  must  be  broken.;]:  Dry  sowing  seed 
was  not  made  unclean  by  such  contact,  ''  but  if  any 
water  be  upon  it"  then  the  defilement  took  place.  § 
How  could  an  Israelite  go  in  and  out  among  people 
who  knew  nothing  of  such  laws  without  continual 
defilement? 

*  Lev.  xi.  32-34.  f  lb.  xv.  5-ro  ;  19-23  ;  26,  27. 

X  lb.  xi.  32-35.  §  lb.  37,  38. 


94  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

Why  should  such  precepts  have  been  given,  and 
what  is  their  relation  to  the  broad  and  universal 
principle  of  acceptance  with  God  by  faith,  already 
announced  to  Abraham,  and  promised  as  the  future 
religion  of  mankind  ?  The  answer  to  these  ques- 
tions is  included  in  St.  Paul's  statement  that  the  law 
**  was  given  because  of  transgressions."  The  function 
of  the  law  as  a  schoolmaster  is  here  shown  more  in 
its  negative  office  of  restraining  from  evil,  than  in 
its  positive  work  of  leading  to  the  good.  The  people 
had  always  shown  a  strong  tendency  to  mingle  with 
the  surrounding  nations,  to  adopt  their  customs  and 
to  give  themselves  up  to  their  idolatries.  It  was  ab- 
solutely necessary  to  prevent  this  in  order  to  keep 
alive  among  them  the  knowledge  of  the  true  God 
and  the  sense  of  their  duty  to  Him.  To  us  the 
means  used  for  this  end  may  seem  excessive ; 
historically,  they  w^ere  scarcely  sufficient  for  their 
purpose.  To  us  they  may  seem  almost  puerile  ;  to 
the  people  of  the  time,  these  detailed  precepts 
were  better  suited  than  the  teaching  of  principles 
which  they  could  not  yet  understand.  In  still  earlier 
times  the  great  judgments  of  the  expulsion  from 
Paradise,  the  flood,  the  confusion  of  tongues,  had 
failed  to  restrain  the  evil  tendencies  of  man.  Now, 
the  peculiar  nation,  chosen  to  be  the  depositary  and 
guardian  of  the  sacred  oracles,  must  be  kept  free  for 
a  time  from  contaminating  influences,  and  to  this 
end  must  be  placed  under  laws  which  should  make 
all  intimate  intercourse  with  others  difficult.  They 
were  children  who  required  to  be  separated  from 
bad  companions  until  their  principles  were  fixed. 


RELATION  OF  PRECEPTS  OF  LAW  TO  GOSPEL.   95 

This,  then,  is  the  relation,  and  a  most  important 
relation  it  was,  of  this  class  of  laws  to  the  Gospel : — 
they  were  "  added  because  of  transgressions "  to 
prevent  the  people  from  wandering  away  from  their 
destined  purpose.  They  were  thus  ''shut  up  unto 
the  faith  which  should  afterwards  be  revealed."  ^ 

Another  large  part  of  the  detailed  precepts  of  the 
law  may  be  classed  as  educational.  Children  require 
to  be  taught  by  rules  rather  than  principles.  They 
cannot  understand  the  latter  until  they  have  been 
first  trained  by  obedience  to  the  former.  The  pre- 
paratory rules  may  or  may  not  be  of  permanent  obli- 
gation ;  they  may  be  of  such  a  character  that  their 
observance  is  necessarily  involved  in  the  principle 
itself,  or  they  may  be  mere  temporary  and  accidental 
exemphfications  of  it  under  existing  conditions.  In 
either  case,  it  is  the  principle  which  is  permanent 
and  important ;  the  rules,  as  rules,  pass  away  when 
they  have  served  their  purpose.  This  relation  of 
the  law  to  the  Gospel  is  very  clearly  brought  out  in 
the  promise  of  the  new  Covenant  by  the  prophet 
Jeremiah  :  "  This  shall  be  the  covenant  that  I  will 
make  with  the  house  of  Israel ;  after  those  days,  saith 
the  Lord,  I  will  put  my  law  in  their  inward  parts, 
and  write  it  in  their  hearts  ;  and  I  will  be  their  God, 
and  they  shall  be  my  people.  And  they  shall  teach 
no  more  every  man  his  neighbor,  and  every  man  his 
brother,  saying,  know  the  LORD  :  for  they  shall  all 
know  me,  from  the  least  of  them  unto  the  greatest 
of  them."f  Under  the  Old  Dispensation  an  expert 
was  required  to  thread  the  maze  of  special  precepts 

*  Gal.  iii.  23.  f  Jer.  xxxi.  33,  34. 


9^  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

and  teach  his  neighbors  what  they  might  and  might 
not  do  on  the  various  occasions  of  Hfe  ;  under  the 
new,  a  principle  is  implanted  in  every  heart,  and 
each  one  is  responsible  to  his  own  Master  for  its 
application. 

In  several  instances  the  rules  given  under  the  law 
are  cited  in  the  New  Testament,  and  the  underlying 
principle  is  brought  out  in  its  application  to  Chris- 
tian duty.  Thus  St.  Paul  cites  more  than  once*  the 
precept,  ''  Thou  shalt  not  muzzle  the  mouth  of  the 
ox  that  treadeth  out  the  corn,"f  and  shows  that  the 
principle  it  was  designed  to  teach  was  a  regard  for 
the  laborer,  especially  the  spiritual  laborer,  allowing 
him  to  receive  benefit  and  support  from  his  work. 
So  strongly  does  he  consider  this  educational  pur- 
pose to  have  been  from  the  first  the  main  object  of 
the  rule  that  he  does  not  hesitate  to  say,  '*  Doth  God 
take  care  for  oxen  ?  or  saith  He  it  altogether  for  our 
sakes?  For  our  sakes,  no  doubt,  this  is  written." 
This  does  not  mean,  as  is  sometimes  asserted,  that 
God  does  not  care  for  the  lower  animals  whom  He 
has  created;  but  only  that  the  object  and  para- 
mount purpose  here  was  the  teaching  of  a  principle 
by  means  of  this  definite  and  special  rule.  There 
are  many  such  rules  which  the  New  Testament 
writers  have  had  no  occasion  to  explain,  and  which 
we  must  study  in  the  light  of  the  examples  they  have 
given.  There  are  a  number  of  precepts  teaching 
the  principle  of  simplicity,  harmony,  and  congruity 
in  all  our  conduct.  This  could  be  taught  of  old  only 
in   its  application  to  particular  acts,  and  those  acts 

*  I  Cor.  ix.  9  ;  i  Tim.  v.  i8.  f  Deut.  xxv.  4. 


RELATION  OF  PRECEPTS  OF  LAW   TO  GOSPEL.   9/ 

were  often  in  themselves  quite  indifferent,  so  that, 
when  the  principle  itself  had  been  learned,  the  rules, 
no  longer  of  value,  would  fall  away  like  the  husk 
from  the  fruit.  Thus  the  precepts  are  given,  "  Thou 
shalt  not  let  thy  cattle  gender  with  a  diverse  kind : 
thou  shalt  not  sow  thy  field  with  mingled  seed : 
neither  shall  a  garment  mingled  of  linen  and  wool- 
len come  upon  thee ; "  "^  *'  Thou  shalt  not  plough 
with  an  ox  and  an  ass  together,"  f  and  others  of  the 
same  kind.  No  man  can  fail  to  see  that  such  pre- 
cepts, as  particular  commands,  are  out  of  date  and 
have  ceased  to  be  of  force  under  the  Gospel ;  and  no 
thoughtful  consideration  of  them,  in  connection  with 
the  times  and  people  to  whom  they  were  given,  can 
refuse  to  recognize  their  great  value  as  a  well  chosen 
form  of  object  teaching,  and  thus  an  education  for  a 
higher  system. 

Some  of  these  rules  belong  both  in  this  educa- 
tional class,  and  also  in  another  having  for  its  object 
restraint  from  the  ways  of  the  heathen.  There  is  a 
precept  three  times  repeated  which  has  to  some 
seemed  unmeaning:  "Thou  shalt  not  seethe  the  kid 
in  his  mother's  milk."  if  The  kid  so  prepared  was  a 
choice  dish  of  the  heathen  eaten  in  connection  with 
some  of  their  idolatrous  feasts.  The  Israelites  must 
be  charged  to  keep  altogether  clear  of  these.  But  it 
seems  also  to  have  had  a  higher  educational  object. 
From  a  merely  utilitarian  point  of  view  there  could 
be  no  harm  done  either  to  the  kid  or  its  mother. 
The  kid  was  already  dead  and  past  all  consciousness  ; 

*  Lev.  xix,  19,  f  Deut.  xxii.  10. 

X  Ex.  xxiii.  19  ;  xxxiv.  26  ;  Deut.  xiv.  21. 
7 


98  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

the  mother  knew  not  what  became  of  the  milk  after 
it  had  once  been  drawn.  But  to  human  sensibilities 
there  was  something  revolting  in  thus  making  the 
mother  in  any  way  instrumental  in  the  destruction 
of  the  offspring;  and  by  forbidding  the  act,  God 
would  teach  that  such  finer  sensibilities  are  not  to 
be  violated.  We  are  not  called  upon  to  contravene 
our  reason  ;  but  there  are  many  situations  in  life 
when  either  our  reason  fails  to  guide  us  at  all,  or  at 
least  fails  in  the  promptness  required  for  instantane- 
ous action,  and  in  these  we  are  to  be  guided  by  what 
are  sometimes  called  instincts  of  right,  by  suscepti- 
bilities which  cannot  be  submitted  to  the  test  of  our 
coarser  and  more  slowly  acting  reason.  Many  laws 
were  given  to  train  the  people  in  restraining  their 
natural  avarice  and  greed.  Here  belong  the  fre- 
quent injunctions  against  receiving  any  interest 
upon  money  from  a  brother  Hebrew;^  and  also 
many  minor  precepts,  such  as  those  forbidding  the 
owner  to  glean  his  fields  and  his  vineyard,  f  and  such 
minute  directions  as,  **  If  a  bird's  nest' chance  to  be 
before  thee  in  any  tree  or  on  the  ground,  whether 
they  be  young  ones  or  eggs,  and  the  dam  sitting 
upon  the  young  or  the  eggs,  thou  shalt  not  take  the 
dam  with  the  young :  but  thou  shalt  in  any  wise  let 
the  dam  go,  and  take  the  young  to  thee.":t  All 
these  laws  have  doubtless  other  objects,  as  kindness 
to  the  poor,  consideration  for  animals,  and  the  like ; 
but  in  these  regards  also  they  are  educational. 

The   arrangements   for  the  magnificence   of   the 

*  Ex.  xxii.  25  ;  Lev.  xxv.  36,  37  ;  Deut.  xxiii.  19,  etc. 

t  Lev,  xix.  9,  10  ;  Deut.  xxiv.  21.  %  Deut.  xxii.  6,  7. 


RELA  TION  OF  PRECEPTS  OF  LA  W  TO  GOSPEL.   99 

tabernacle,  for  the  reverence  with  which  it  was  to  be 
treated,  for  the  gorgeous  robes  of  the  high-priest 
with  the  plate  upon  his  forehead,  "  Holiness  unto 
the  Lord,"  whatever  other  objects  they  may  have 
served,  were  thoroughly  educational,  designed  to 
teach  reverence  and  awe  for  the  Majesty  on  high. 
Another  lesson  taught  by  the  tabernacle  is  beauti- 
fully brought  out  in  New  Testament  interpreta- 
tion. The  Holy  of  holies  was  separated  from  the 
outer  sanctuary  by  a  vail  through  which  none  might 
ever  pass  save  only  the  high-priest  on  one  day  in  the 
year  in  the  midst  of  solemn  sacrifices :  **  the  Holy 
Ghost  thus  signifying,  that  the  way  into  the  Holiest 
of  all  was  not  yet  made  manifest,  while  as  the  first 
tabernacle  was  yet  standing."*  The  whole  ritual  of 
sacrifice,  of  purifications  and  the  like,  whatever  the 
further  ofBce,  was  designed  to  educate  the  people  in 
the  sense  of  their  own  sinfulness  and  of  the  holiness 
of  God — an  education  always  needed  by  man,  and 
pre-eminently  necessary  as  a  foundation  for  the 
teaching  of  the  Gospel.  This  education  was  carried 
out  in  little  m.atters  as  well  as  in  great.  The  very 
fringes  the  people  were  required  to  wear  upon  the 
hem  of  their  garments,  the  mottoes  from  Scripture 
they  were  told  to  have  ever  before  their  eyes,  were 
intended  to  separate  them  from  other  people,  ex- 
pressly on  the  ground  that  they  were  called  to  be  a 
people  holy  to  their  God.  The  elaborate  arrange- 
ments for  personal  cleanliness,  and  for  the  cleanli- 
ness of  houses  and  garments  and  the  like,  were  not 
merely  for  purposes  of  health  in  a  hot  country,  but 
*  Heb.  ix.  8. 


lOO  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

to  teach  the  lesson  of  inward  purity,  of  which  all  this 
was  the  symbol  and  shadow. 

Another  class  closely  connected  with  the  forego- 
ing, may  properly  be  called  typical.  The  subject  of 
typology  is  a  large  one,  which  will  be  treated  by 
itself,  and  for  the  present  there  is  no  question  of  re- 
serriblances,  real  or  imaginary,  between  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments,  nor  of  what  are  known  as  pro- 
phetic types  ;  but  simply  of  precepts  in  which  some- 
thing was  required  setting  forth  in  sensible  form  some 
truth  or  principle  afterwards  to  be  more  clearly  and 
spiritually  revealed.  The  New  Testament  refers  to 
many  instances  of  such  typical  teaching,  and  per- 
haps no  part  of  its  use  of  the  Old  Testament  has 
been  more  misunderstood. 

As  instances  of  this  class  of  precepts  may  be  taken 
some  of  the  lesser  commands  in  regard  to  the  sacri- 
fices. The  provision  that  all  victims  must  be  "  with- 
out blemish  "  (with  only  a  partial  exception  in  the 
case  of  mere  thank-offerings),  while  it  had  its  higher 
typical  import,  was  also  designed  to  train  the  peo- 
ple to  a  recognition  of  the  Divine  character.  To 
One  perfect  in  purity  and  holiness,  only  that  which 
was  "spotless  and  without  blemish"  might  be  of- 
fered. In  the  requirement  that  the  oil  of  the  sanctu- 
ary should  be  of  the  best  and  taken  from  the  first  flow 
of  the  olives,  the  same  principle  was  involved,  and 
also  it  was  taught  that  the  return  to  the  Giver  of  all 
should  be  made  from  the  choicest  of  His  gifts.  In 
the  laws  of  the  sweet  incense,  forbidden  to  the  peo- 
ple in  their  houses  and  for  any  other  use  than  wor- 
ship, there  was  brought  out  in  addition  the  separa- 


RELATION  OF  PRECEPTS  OF  LAW  TO  GOSPEL.    lOI 

tion  between  the  service  of  God  and  the  pleasures 
of  ordinary  life.  The  educational  and  preparatory- 
character  of  other  details  in  the  laws  of  sacrifice  is 
easily  seen  by  any  careful  reader.  One  other  instance 
may  be  given  in  connection  with  the  sin  offering. 
In  genera]  it  was  required  that  this  offering  should 
be  an  animal,  and  the  principle  is  broadly  laid  down 
that  *'  without  shedding  of  blood  is  no  remission."  "^ 
But  there  might  be  those  too  poor  to  command 
even  this  offering.  Yet  the  principle  must  be  set 
forth  that  every  one  stood  in  need  of,  and  must 
present  a  sacrifice  for  his  sin.  Therefore  there  was 
allowed  and  required  in  such  exceptional  cases  an 
offering  of  fine  flour,  f  Herein  two  points  were 
typically  taught :  first,  that  all  were  sinful  and  must 
receive  an  atonement;  secondly,  that  the  lesser  prin- 
ciple (set  forth  in  the  form  of  the  offering)  must 
yield  to  the  greater  (set  forth  in  the  universality  of 
the  requirement).  This  latter  teaching  man  has  even 
now  but  imperfectly  learned.  Our  Lord  often  in- 
sists upon  it,  especially  in  regard  to  the  observance 
of  the  Sabbath  ;  here  the  direct  command  was  by 
no  means  to  be  neglected,  and  yet  He  shows  that 
this  must  give  way  to  higher  obligations.  He  illus- 
trates this  by  allowing  acts  of  necessity  on  that  day, 
quoting  in  justification  the  Old  Testament  precept, 
"  I  will  have  mercy  and  not  sacrifice,"  :j:  and  by  per- 
forming on  the  Sabbath  miracles  of  mercy ;  and  also 
by  alleging  the  precepts  of  the  law  itself,  requiring 
the  priests  on  the  Sabbath  to  violate  the  letter  of 

*  Heb.  ix.  22.  f  Lev.  v.  11-13. 

X  Matt.  ix.  13  ;   xii.  7  ;  Hos.  vi.  6. 


102  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

the  law  in  fulfilling  its  higher  purpose  of  the  worship 
of  God.*  He  also  shows  how  David  directly  vio- 
lated the  law  in  the  eating  of  the  shew-bread,t  and 
was  guiltless,  because  the  ordinary  definite  precept 
must  give  way  when  a  higher  necessity,  and  one  un- 
provided for,  arose.  This  typical  teaching  of  the 
law  is  involved  in  every  class  of  its  precepts.  Sev- 
eral instances  will  incidentally  be  mentioned  in  the 
treatment  of  the  priesthood  and  of  sacrifices. 

We  may  pass  on  to  another  class  of  precepts, 
those  which  were  directly  preparatory  for  the  Gos- 
pel. These  are  of  two  kinds  :  first,  commands  which 
are  absolutely  the  same  as  those  of  the  Gospel,  such 
as  "  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thine 
heart  and  with  all  thy  soul  and  with  all  thy  might,":f 
and  "Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself." § 
It  was  hardly  to  be  expected  that  many  of  the  an- 
cients should  understand  the  force  of  such  com- 
mands or  very  seriously  seek  to  fulfil  them  ;  yet 
they  were  placed  in  the  law  that  there  might  be 
this  full  declaration  of  the  Divine  will  for  the  few 
who  could  enter  into  its  meaning ;  and  also  for  those 
who  were  incapable  of  this,  that  they  might  at  least 
know  of  the  existence  of  a  standard  higher  than 
they  had  yet  attained.  In  both  ways  they  were  a 
preparation  for  the  Gospel,  as  showing  that  the  law 

*  Matt.  xii.  6  ;  Num.  xxviii.  g,  lo, 

•f-  Mark,  ii.  25,  26.  and  Lev.  xxiv.  5,  6,  9.  That  David's  flight  from 
Saul  was  on  the  Sabbath — another  violation  of  the  law — is  shown  by 
the  fact  that  Ahimelech  says  the  shew-bread  had  been  replaced  with 
hot  bread  on  that  day.     I   Sam.  xxi.  3-6. 

%  Deut.  vi.  5  ;  x.  12  ;  xi.  i,  13,  22  ;  xix.  9  ;  xxx.  6. 
■    §  Lev.  xix.  18,  34. 


RELATION  OF  PRECEPTS  OF  LA  W  TO  GOSPEL.    IO3 

itself,  though   it   could  not  yet  much  insist   upon 
them,  recognized  the  principles  of  the  Gospel. 

Much  more  common  are  precepts  of  a  different 
kind,  in  which  a  standard  of  duty  is  enjoined  above 
that  to  which  the  people  were  accustomed,  but  still 
falling  so  far  below  the  Gospel  requirements  as  to 
seem  to  us  faulty.  This  class  of  commands  has 
been  mentioned  in  a  former  lecture  as  especially 
giving  occasion  to  unfounded  cavils.  When  it  is 
impossible  to  raise  a  people  to  the  highest  standard, 
it  is  plainly  the  dictate  both  of  love  and  of  wisdom 
to  lead  them  on  towards  that  end  as  far  as  they 
can  bear.  When  Moses,  ''  for  the  hardness  of  their 
hearts  "  suffered  a  man  to  give  his  wife  a  writing  of 
divorce  and  put  her  away,  he  certainly  taught  some- 
thing which,  however  sanctioned  by  the  laws  of 
some  modern  states,  was  very  far  below  the  moral- 
ity of  the  Gospel.  Yet  in  reality,  so  far  from  op- 
posing that  morality,  he  was  leading  the  people 
towards  it  as  far  as  was  then  practicable.  Before 
the  law,  the  husband  was  accustomed  to  consider 
himself  as  the  absolute  and  arbitrary  master.  If  the 
wife  displeased  him,  he  had  nothing  to  do  but  to 
send  her  away,  perhaps  in  a  mere  fit  of  temper. 
The  mere  existence  of  this  right  of  repudiation  in- 
creased the  absolute  dependence  of  the  wife  upon 
the  husband,  and  tended  to  reduce  her  to  the  con- 
dition of  a  slave,  and  to  degrade  the  family  relation 
in  many  ways.  But  the  right  was  too  highly  valued 
by  the  husband  to  allow  of  its  abrupt  and  total  abo- 
lition. Moses,  therefore,  required  that  for  a  divorce, 
a  legal  and  formal  document  should  be  given,  which 


104  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

implied  time  and  consideration.  Many  other  checks 
and  restraints  were  imposed,  and  divorce  seems 
never  to  have  been  common  among  the  Hebrews, 
or  at  least,  there  is  scarcely  any  mention  of  it  in 
their  history.  In  every  way  a  large  advance  was 
made  from  the  previous  customs  of  the  people. 

The  same  things  are  to  be  said  of  the  laws  of 
slavery  mentioned  in  a  previous  lecture.  It  is 
worth  while  to  recall  them  for  a  moment  to  mark 
how  great  was  the  amelioration  in  this  matter  in- 
troduced by  the  Levitical  code.  We  are  familiar 
enough  with  the  absolute  power  of  the  master  over 
the  slave  among  the  nations  of  antiquity,  and  know 
how  frequently  this  power  was  abused.  A  very  dif- 
ferent state  of  things  prevailed  among  the  Hebrews, 
In  this,  as  in  some  other  matters,  the  law  was  dif- 
ferent for  themselves  and  for  foreigners;  because 
not  only  were  they  still  unprepared  for  the  idea  of 
the  universal  brotherhood  of  man,  but  in  order  that 
they  might  become  so,  it  was  important  to  preserve 
for  the  present  a  sharply  marked  nationality.  Of 
foreign  slaves  there  is  little  especial  mention  in  the 
law,  although  they  come  under  the  general  precepts 
of  justice  and  kindness  and  consideration  applying 
to  all  slaves  alike.  The  power  of  the  master  was 
in  many  ways  circumscribed,  and  the  rights  of  the 
slaves,  as  men,  were  recognized,  so  that  their  con- 
dition was  greatly  bettered,  and  the  institution  as- 
sumed quite  a  different  aspect  from  that  which  it 
bore  among  the  heathen.  But  the  most  important 
point  was  that  any  foreign  slave,  by  becoming  a 
proselyte  and  submitting  to   circumcision,  entered 


RELATION  OF  PRECEPTS  OF  LAW  TO  GOSPEL.    10$ 

into  the  condition  of  a  Hebrew  slave  with  all  his 
rights  and  advantages.  These  rights  were  such  as 
practically  to  transform  Hebrew  slavery  into  a  mere 
form  of  contract  labor  for  a  certain  term  of  years. 
At  whatever  time  the  Hebrew  became  a  slave,  in 
the  seventh  or  Sabbatical  year  he  was  to  go  free.* 
He  might  have  been  in  servitude  six  years  or  only 
one  year;  in  that  year  he  was  free,  and  his  master 
in  manumitting  him  was  bound  to  make  ample  pro- 
vision for  his  immediate  necessities.f  The  only 
exception  to  this  was  in  the  free  choice  of  the  slave, 
who  might,  after  his  experience  up  to  the  Sabbati- 
cal year,  then  elect  to  make  his  condition  perma- 
nent.ij:  In  this  I  do  not  speak  of  the  actual  state 
of  the  people;  but  of  what  the  law  required.  The 
Sabbatical  year  we  know  was  utterly  neglected 
down  to  the  time  of  the  captivity,§  and  it  is  likely 
that  the  mitigations  of  slavery  which  depended 
upon  it,  were  also  neglected.  But  the  question  is 
not  how  far  the  people  observed  the  law,  but  what 
the  law  was  in  itself,  and  what  was  its  intended 
effect  in  preparing  for  the  Gospel. 

This  is  perhaps  enough  to  say  of  particular  pre- 
cepts of  the  law  in  detail.  Many  others  might  be 
treated  in  the  same  way  ;  but  they  will  be  found 
nearly  all  to  come  under  one  or  more  of  the  four 
heads  enumerated :  national,  educational,  typical, 
and  directly  preparatory.  In  all  of  these  classes  it 
has  been  seen  that  the  law  was,  and  was  designed  to 

*  Ex.  xxi.  2  ;  Deut.  xv.  12  ;  Jer.  xxxiv.  g,  14. 

f  Deut.  XV.  13,  14.  X  Ex.  xxi.  5,  6  ;  Deut.  xv.  i6-i8. 

§  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  21. 


I06  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

be  "  our  schoolmaster  to  bring  us  to  Christ."  It 
gave  such  precepts  as  were  needed  by  the  people 
to  lead  them  towards  the  higher  revelation  of  the 
Gospel  and  prepare  them  for  its  reception.  No  ob- 
jection to  this  can  be  based  upon  the  fact  that  only 
a  small  part  of  the  people  actually  did  embrace  the 
faith  of  Christ.  This  was  their  characteristic  course 
with  every  revelation  that  had  ever  been  made.  A 
thousand  years  was  required  to  bring  them  to  a 
tolerable  observance  of  the  Mosaic  law,  and  even 
then  this  was  accomplished  only  by  the  rejection 
of  the  great  mass  of  the  nation.  They  showed  the 
same  disposition  towards  all  their  inspired  teachers. 
*'  Which  of  the  prophets,"  St.  Stephen  asks  of  his 
contemporaries,  '•'■  have  not  your  fathers  persecuted  ? 
and  they  have  slain  them  which  showed  before  of 
the  coming  of  the  Just  One."  *  It  seems  probable, 
from  the  incidental  notices  in  the  book  of  Acts,  that 
as  many  of  the  people  embraced  the  faith  of  Christ 
in  Apostolic  days  as  ever  returned  from  the  Babyl- 
onish captivity. 

Another  point  in  the  relation  of  these  precepts  of 
the  law  to  the  Gospel  is  the  recognized  insufficiency 
of  the  former  to  salvation.  The  law  did  not,  and 
could  not  secure  to  man  the  righteousness  he  needs 
for  acceptance  with  God.  St.  Paul  is  explicit 
upon  this  matter.  He  writes,  "  If  there  had  been  a 
law  given  which  could  have  given  life,  verily  right- 
ousness  should  have  been  by  the  law."f  Yet  in 
this  its  weakness,  it  did  what  it  could  by  inculcat- 
ing acts  of  kindness  towards  the  poor,  of  considera- 

*  Acts,  vii.  52.  f  Gal.  iii.  21. 


RELATION  OF  PRECEPTS  OF  LAW  TO  GOSPEL.    lO/ 

tion  for  the  dependent,  of  mercy  and  love  to  the 
stranger  and  the  afflicted,  to  teach  the  habits  re- 
quired by  the  Gospel  and  mould  the  character  into 
the  pattern  acceptable  to  God. 

Leaving  for  future  consideration  the  more  im- 
portant matters  concerning  the  priesthood,  there  are 
yet  sundry  minor  provisions  which  do  not  affect  the 
essential  character  of  the  institution  and  which  may 
claim  attention  in  this  connection.  The  selection 
of  a  hereditary  class  of  men  to  fulfil  its  functions 
may  seem  at  first  sight  quite  at  variance  with  the  ar- 
rangements for  religious  teachers  under  the  Gospel, 
and  to  lead  to  an  entirely  different  conception  of 
their  ofiflce.  The  latter  objection  is  well  founded, 
and  it  will  appear  farther  on  that  the  prototype  of 
the  Christian  teacher  is  to  be  found  rather  in  the 
prophet  than  in  the  priest.  Possibly  the  setting 
forth  of  this  distinction  may  have  been  one  of  the 
incidental  objects  in  making  the  ancient  priests 
hereditary ;  but  there  were  others  of  a  more  im- 
mediate importance.  The  custom  of  inheritance 
of  office  in  the  priesthood  was  already  familiar  to 
the  people  among  other  nations,  and  especially 
among  the  Egyptians ;  but  to  the  Israelites  it  con- 
curred with  the  general  principle  of  heredity  on 
which  the  Mosaic  legislation  was  founded,  and  which 
kept  constantly  before  their  minds  the  fact  that 
their  national  existence  depended  upon  an  heredity 
whose  central  point  was  the  future  Redeemer  of 
the  world.  It  is  plain  also  that  by  means  of  this 
arrangement  the  powerful  influence  of  hereditary 
associations  and  traditions  was  brought  to  bear  in 


I08         THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

keeping  up  among  the  priesthood,  however  corrupt, 
the  recognition  of  Jehovah  during  long  periods  of 
Israel's  apostasy  and  sin.  Without  this  one  great 
bar  would  have  been  wanting  by  which  Israel  was 
**shut  up  unto  the  Gospel." 

To  the  small  family  of  Aaron,  who  alone  might 
execute  the  functions  of  priests,  were  afterwards 
added  as  assistants  and  servants  the  whole  tribe  of 
Levi,  both  that  the  position  and  dignity  of  the  im- 
mediate ministrants  in  the  Divine  service  might  be 
increased,  and  also  that  this  service  itself  might  be 
celebrated  with  the  perfection,  and  with  the  elabo- 
rateness of  ritual,  and  later  of  musical  accompani- 
ment, which  so  greatly  served  to  impress  its  majesty 
upon  the  people,  and  which  could  only  be  carried 
out  by  the  assistance  of  numbers. 

In  regard  to  both  these  bodies,  the  smaller 
Aaronic  family,  and  the  large  tribe  of  Levi,  two 
lessons  were  to  be  taught  of  difficult  combination, 
and  yet  in  their  principle  important  for  all  ages: 
First,  that  as  the  especial  ministrants  of  the  sanc- 
tuary and  devoted  to  the  immediate  service  of  God, 
they  were  separate  from  other  men  ;  and  secondly, 
that  as  men  they  were  fellow-citizens  with  their 
brethren  and  stood,  before  God  and  before  the  laws, 
upon  precisely  the  same  footing  as  other  men. 
The  first  point  was  emphasized  by  cutting  them  off 
from  an  inheritance  of  the  land  with  the  others,  and 
giving  them  cities  for  residence  scattered  among  all 
the  tribes ;  by  appointing  for  the  priests,  though  not 
for  the  Levites,  a  peculiar  dress  when  engaged  in 
their   holy  functions,  and  this  dress    marked   by  a 


RELATION  OF  PRECEPTS  OF  LAW  TO  GOSPEL.    lOQ 

symbolical  purity  and  cleanliness ;  by  requiring,  as  a 
condition  for  entering  upon  the  discharge  of  their 
functions,  a  high  standard  of  physical  perfection  ; 
and  by  imposing  upon  them  alone  the  duty,  as  the 
representatives  of  God,  of  consuming  the  flesh  of  the 
sin-offerings  and  certain  other  offerings  devoted  to 
God.  There  were  also  many  other  provisions,  partly 
concerning  the  priests  alone,  partly  relating  to  the 
whole  tribe  of  Levi,  having  the  same  object,  such  as 
the  strict  injunction  that  none  but  they  should  bear 
the  ark  and  the  vessels  of  the  sanctuary,  that  they 
should  proclaim  the  feasts,  should  abstain  from  the 
ordinary  signs  of  mourning,  should  be  restricted  in 
their  marriage,  and  many  other  statutes.  By  all  this 
legislation  it  was  declared  that  those  devoted  to  the 
immediate  service  of  the  sanctuary  were  separate 
from  other  men,  and  placed  under  many  obliga- 
tions. On  the  other  hand,  what  is  commonly 
known  as  "  ecclesiasticism,"  so  fully  developed  in 
the  mediaeval  church,  was  utterly  discountenanced 
in  the  Sinaitic  legislation.  When  the  priests  came 
out  of  the  sanctuary  they  were  not  merely  allowed, 
but  required  to  put  off  their  distinctive  dress ;  they 
were  amenable  to  the  same  laws,  both  penal  and  civil, 
and  were  tried  by  the  same  courts  as  their  brethren, 
and  this  fact  in  itself  placed  them,  in  all  their  ordi- 
nary life,  upon  the  same  footing  with  other  men ;  it 
was  necessary  for  their  support  that  the  Levites 
should  receive  tithes  from  the  other  tribes,  but  that 
in  this  respect  also  they  might  be  assimilated  to  their 
brethren,  the  Levites  themselves  must  pay  tithes 
to  the  priests — cut  off  by  their  duties   from   other 


no  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

means  of  livelihood ;  and  above  all,  from  the  hum- 
blest Levite  to  the  high-priest  himself,  they  must  all 
offer  sacrifices  and  sin-offerings  for  themselves.  Thus 
both  objects  were  attained  and  both  principles  w-ere 
taught.  In  so  far  as  the  authorized  ministrations 
before  God  were  concerned,  they  were  separate  from 
others,  called  to  be  and  symbolically  made,  "  holy, 
harmless,  and  undefiled;"  beyond  this  they  were 
men,  fellow-citizens  with  their  brethren  of  the  com- 
monwealth of  God,  with  the  same  duties  and  the 
same  responsibilities. 

The  consideration  of  these  incidental  matters 
shows  how  all  the  detailed  precepts  of  the  law  had 
for  their  object  the  preparation  of  the  people  for  the 
Gospel,  by  keeping  them  separate  from  heathen  con- 
tamination, by  educating  them  through  rules  up  to 
the  principles  afterwards  to  be  revealed,  by  typical 
setting  forth  of  truths  they  could  not  yet  receive  in 
full  clearness  of  revelation,  and  finally  by  training 
them  in  habits  of  conduct  and  elements  of  character 
directly  preparatory  for  the  Gospel.  Thus  with  that 
harmony  and  perfection  which  marks  all  the  Divine 
works,  was  the  leading  principle  of  the  Levitical 
law  carried  out  in  detail,  and  in  small  matters  as  well 
as  in  great,  "  the  law  was  our  schoolmaster  to  bring 
us  to  Christ." 


LECTURE    V. 

SACRIFICE. 

The  earliest  records  of  our  race,  sacred  and  pro- 
fane alike,  represent  man  as  seeking  acceptance  with 
God  by  means  of  sacrifice.  It  does  not  matter 
whether  this  was  originally  done  by  immediate 
Divine  command,  or  whether  the  human  mind  itself 
perceived  the  fitness  of  the  rite  ;  in  either  case,  the 
sacrifice  was  from  the  first  accepted,  and  as  soon  as 
laws  were  given,  was  regulated  and  required.  Be- 
fore that  time  there  is  little  to  be  said  about  sac- 
rifice. It  had  two  general  forms,  the  whole  burnt- 
offering,  as  in  the  sacrifices  of  Abel,*  of  Noah,f  of 
Abraham,  X  and  frequently  among  the  nations  of  the 
world ;  and  of  what  were  afterwards  called  *'  peace 
offerings,  '  in  which  only  a  part  of  the  victim  was 
consumed  upon  the  altar  and  the  remainder  used  by 
the  worshippers  in  a  sacrificial  feast,  as  in  the  case  of 
Jacob  and  Laban,  §  and  very  often  in  the  sacrificial 
feasts  mentioned  by  classical  writers.  In  addition 
to  these,  a  thank-offering  was  customary,  which  the 
worshipper  simply  consecrated  to  God  as  a  recog- 
nition of  the  blessings  received  from  Him. 

Nothing  is  anywhere  said  of  the  especial  meaning 

*  Gen.  iv.  4,  5,  f  /<^.  viii.  20. 

:f  Id.  xxii.  13.  §  /d.  xxxi.  54. 


112  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

of  either  of  these  kinds  of  sacrifice.  Left  to  infer 
this  from  the  nature  of  the  sacrifices  themselves,  it 
is  generally  considered  that  both  kinds,  as  under 
the  law,  had  more  or  less  of  a  propitiatory  character, 
but  the  whole  burnt  offering  more  particularly  sig- 
nified entire  consecration  to  God ;  and  the  peace 
offering,  the  desire  to  hold  communication  with 
Him,  and  to  sanctify  to  Him  the  events  of  ordinary 
life.  The  idea  of  propitiation  is  nowhere  distinctly 
brought  out,  but  may  reasonably  be  supposed  to 
inhere  in  the  sacrifices  of  the  patriarchs,  both  be- 
cause it  was  the  prominent  idea  in  sacrifice  among 
the  heathen,  and  because  it  was  expressly  recognized 
and  made  prominent  in  the  sacrificial  system  of  the 
law.  The  sacrifices  of  Cain  and  Abel  have  some- 
times been  considered  sin  offerings,  and  may  have 
been  so ;  but  there  is  no  evidence  of  this  in  the  nar- 
rative except  by  giving  to  the  word  sin  (ver.  7)  the 
sense  of  sin  offering,  a  technical  sense  never  else- 
where used  until  the  giving  of  the  law,  some  thou- 
sands of  years  later  than  the  time  of  Abel.  Still 
another  use  of  ancient,  sacrifice  was  as  the  solemn 
seal  of  a  covenant,  first  between  God  and  man,  as 
in  the  case  of  Abraham,^  and  afterwards  probably 
between  man  and  man.f  Whatever  may  have  been 
the  immediate  purpose  in  these  various  kinds  of 
sacrifice,  there  is  a  plain  recognition  in  all  of  them 
that  man  is  separated  from  God,  and  that  in  ap- 
proaching Him  it  is  necessary  in  some  way  to  re- 
move the  intervening  bar  of  human  sinfulness.  At 
the  same  time  it  is  plain  that  there  could  be  no  real 

*  Gen.  XV.  9-21.         f  See  Gen.  xxi.  30-32 ;  Heb.  ix.  16, 17. 


SACRIFICE.     .  113 

power  in  the  blood  of  bulls  and  goats  to  atone  for 
moral  transgressions,  and  this  fact  was  emphasized 
by  the  constant  repetition  of  the  sacrifices.  Along 
with  this  there  was  the  constant  remembrance  that 
final  victory  over  the  power  of  evil  had  been  prom- 
ised to  the  woman's  seed.  Sacrifice  was  always, 
therefore,  typical.  It  taught  the  sinfulness  of  man 
and  the  necessity  of  doing  away  with  that  sinfulness 
in  order  to  his  acceptance  with  a  God  perfect  in 
holiness.  Yet  the  means  used  were  manifestly  in- 
adequate to  the  purpose,  and  there  was  the  promise 
that  the  purpose  should  be  accomplished.  Hence 
they  were  a  constant  showing  forth  of  something 
not  yet  revealed.  We  have  no  means  of  knowing 
how  far  their  nature  was  understood  in  the  earliest 
times ;  but  after  the  establishment  of  the  common- 
wealth of  Israel,  from  Samuel  and  David  down,  it  is 
clear  that  the  prophets  looked  upon  sacrifice  as  only 
the  outward  form  of  approach  to  God,  and  regarded 
the  inward  disposition  of  the  heart  as  essential. 

When  the  time  of  the  Sinaitic  legislation  is 
reached,  the  whole  institution  of  sacrifice  is  sys- 
tematized and  arranged  by  express  Divine  com- 
mand. It  is  to  the  institution  as  thus  ordered  that 
the  references  of  the  New  Testament  are  chiefly 
made ;  and  it  is  on  this,  as  the  only  system  of  which 
we  have  much  definite  knowledge,  that  we  must 
rely  as  giving  us  the  sacrificial  bond  of  connection 
between  the  two  Covenants.  That  it  may  be  dis- 
tinctly before  the  mind,  it  will  be  well  briefly  to 
review  the  main  points  of  the  Levitical  sacrificial 
system. 
8 


114  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

First  of  all,  there  was  one  peculiar  sacrifice,  the 
Passover,  which  was  instituted  before  the  giving  of 
the  Siriaitic  law,  and  which  does  not  fall  into  its 
classifications,  but  which  was  recognized  and  pre- 
served in  it  as  one  of  the  most  important  and  sig- 
nificant of  all  its  institutions.  When  the  Passover 
was  first  commanded  there  was  no  established 
priesthood,  no  sanctuary,  and  no  altar,  and  it  was 
provided  for  a  momentary  and  pressing  emergency. 
Later  all  these  things  were  changed ;  yet  it  was  to  be 
most  carefully  observed  during  all  the  generations 
of  Israel.  The  head  of  each  family  was  to  offer  the 
victim  and  to  sprinkle  its  blood  upon  the  side-posts 
and  the  lintel  of  the  door  of  his  house.  Thus  each 
man  acted  as  the  priest  of  his  own  house  in  accord- 
ance with  the  call  to  the  whole  people  to  be  "  a 
kingdom  of  priests  and  an  holy  nation.*  After  the 
erection  of  the  tabernacle  and  the  establishment  of 
the  priesthood,  no  change  occurred  in  this  respect, f 
and  this  priestly  function  of  every  Israelite  in  con- 
nection with  the  Passover  was  maintained  as  a  sig- 
nificant mark  of  their  original  vocation  of  which 
they  had  proved  themselves  unworthy.  Several 
modifications  of  the  original  institution  were  after- 
wards introduced  ;  the  Passover  must  be  slain  only 
in  the  place  of  the  central  sanctuary ;:j:  "  a  holy  con- 
vocation "  should  be  kept  on  the  following  day; 
and  others  which  were  in  part  provided  for  at  the 
original  institution,  but  which  were  impracticable 
on  the  occasion  of  its  first  observance,  immediately 
followed  as  it  was  by  the  march  from  Egypt.    More 

*  Ex.  xix.  6.  \  Num.  ix.  3,  4.  %  Deut.  xvi.  2-8. 


SACRIFICE.  115 

important  was  the  change  introduced  in  the  time  of 
Hezekiah,  when,  on  account  of  the  general  unclean- 
ness  of  the  people,  the  Passover  was  slain  by  the 
Levites  and  the  blood  sprinkled  by  the  priests.* 
This  was  repeated  in  the  time  of  Josiah,f  and  ac- 
cording to  Jewish  authorities,  became  the  common 
practice  in  later  ages.:]: 

The  Passover  has  a  peculiar  interest  in  the  rela- 
tion of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  both  because 
at  its  celebration  the  Lord's  supper  was  instituted, 
and  thus  the  continual  rite  of  the  Old  Covenant  re- 
placed by  the  continual  sacrament  of  the  New ;  and 
because  the  Apostles  especially  point  to  it  as  a  type 
of  the  one  sacrifice  on  Calvary  :  "  Christ,  our  Pass- 
over, is  sacrificed  for  us."§  This,  therefore,  is  a 
meeting  point  and  bond  of  connection  between  the 
two  dispensations.  Wherein  is  it  so  ?  In  the  first 
place  the  original  Passover  was  the  turning  point 
in  the  deliverance  of  God's  people  from  Egyptian 
bondage.  There  had  been  long  preparation  and  a 
severe  struggle  with  Pharaoh  ;  but  this  marked  the 
decisive  point.  Now,  when  this  is  said  typically  to 
point  forward  to  the  deliverance  of  God's  people 
from  the  bondage  of  sin  into  the  liberty  of  the  Gos- 
pel, the  saying  is  liable  to  be  misunderstood.  Cer- 
tainly the  people  were  not  directly  taught  by  this 
to  look  forward  to  the  vicarious  death  of  Christ 
upon  the  cross  ;  for  they  never  had  this  idea,  nor 
was  there  any  reason  that  they  should.     But  they 

*  2  Chr.  XXX.  15-19.  t  lb.  XXXV.  11, 

X  See  Lightfoot,  Ministetium  Templi,  c.  xii,,  Works,  I.,  p.  727,  ed. 
Fran.  1699.  §  i  Cor.  v.  7. 


Il6  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

were  taught  some  other  things  which  in  the  Divine 
plan  for  man's  salvation  necessarily  involved  this. 
They  knew  that  they  were  the  people  of  whom 
should  be  born  the  world's  Redeemer,  and  that  their 
deliverance  from  Egypt  was  a  step  in  their  foretold 
national  history  leading  to  this  end.  They  recog- 
nized that  at  the  moment  of  the  institution  of  the 
Passover  a  great  judgment  was  impending  upon  the 
land  from  which  they  were  to  escape  by  the  use  of 
Divinely  appointed  means.  In  all  after  ages  they 
observed  it  in  memory  of  these  facts.  But  was  that 
memory  only  a  recollection  of  the  past,  or  did  it  also 
set  forth,  whether  they  understood  it  or  not,  the 
things  of  the  future  ?  Certainly  the  latter  at  every 
point.  The  deliverance  from  Egypt  was  not  the 
triumph  over  the  power  of  sin  ;  but  it  was  a  step 
towards  the  accomplishment  of  that  promised  tri- 
umph ;  and  the  commemoration  of  this  step,  like 
that  of  every  stage  of  an  unfinished  work,  necessarily 
joined  the  thought  of  past  progress  with  the  hope 
of  its  completion.  The  deliverance  in  the  one  case 
as  in  the  other,  could  only  be  brought  about  by  the 
intervention  of  the  Divine  power,  and  was  effected 
in  a  way  which  human  sagacity  could  not  have  fore- 
seen. The  people  were  taught  by  the  Passover  the 
same  lesson  of  faith,  of  entire  dependence  upon  God, 
which  is  required  for  the  appropriation  of  the  Chris- 
tian means  of  salvation.  Finally,  the  means  used 
was  sacrifice,  "  for  without  shedding  of  blood  is  no 
remission,"  and  this  use  of  the  sacrifice  must  be  the 
personal  act  of  each  representative  Israelite.  The 
connection  then  of  the  two   Dispensations  in  and 


SACRIFICE.  117 

through  the  Passover  does  not  h'e  in  any  external 
resemblance,  though  there  was  enough  of  external 
resemblance  to  point  the  thought  to  the  deeper  in- 
ward connection  ;  but  in  the  two  facts  that  the  same 
essential  truths  are  taught  in  the  one  as  in  the  other, 
and  that  the  one  was  a  step  towards  the  other.  In 
both  exemption  from  impending  danger  is  obtained 
by  the  use  of  the  Divinely  appointed  means  ;  in  both 
deliverance  from  a  terrible  condition  is  reached  by 
simple  trust  in  God  and  the  use  of  the  appointed 
means  ;  in  both  the  forfeiture  of  life  is  the  necessary 
condition  of  pardon  and  of  the  favor  of  God,  and 
the  means  provided  must  be  personally  used  by 
each  and  every  man.  Certainly  these  main  points 
in  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  for  man's  redemption  were 
set  forth  to  the  people  of  that  time  as  clearly  as  they 
well  could  be  by  any  sensible  symbol.  Therefore, 
as  in  the  Lord's  supper  "  ye  do  show  forth  the 
Lord's  death  until  He  come,"  so  not  without  reason 
is  it  considered  that  in  the  Passover,  which  preceded 
it  and  on  which  it  was  founded,  there  was  a  showing 
forth  of  the  same  sacrifice  in  type  and  symbol. 

The  sacrifices  under  the  law  may  be  arranged  in 
four  general  classes,  with  some  subdivisions.  There 
are  also  a  few  special  institutions  not  included  in 
any  of  these  classes.  It  is  worth  while  to  call  to 
mind  the  chief  characteristics  of  these,  even  at  the 
risk  of  repeating  what  is  very  familiar.  The  an- 
cient whole  burnt  offering  was  perpetuated,  and 
became  the  regular  daily  morning  and  evening 
sacrifice.  It  was  also  required  in  the  great  feasts, 
and  might  be  offered  by  any  one  at  any  time.     The 


Il8  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

victim  might  be  selected  from  any  of  the  sacrificial 
animals,  but  must  always  be  a  male,  except  in  the 
case  of  birds,  where  no  distinction  of  sex  was  rec- 
ognized."^ The  special  provisions  of  the  law  in  re- 
gard to  this  offering  were :  that  the  offerer  must  lay 
his  hand  upon  its  head,  must  kill  it,  and  that  the 
priest  must  sprinkle  its  blood  upon  the- altar,  and 
prepare  and  burn  its  flesh.  The  minchah,  called  in 
our  version  meat  offering  or  oblation,  was  an  un- 
bloody offering  ordinarily  accompanying  the  animal 
sacrifices,  though  in  some  special  cases,  as  in  the 
offering  of  the  first  sheaf  of  the  harvest  on  the 
morrow  after  the  Passover, f  it  was  presented  alone. 
Its  usual  material  was  fine  flour,  oil,  and  these  two 
combined  in  cakes  of  various  kinds,  incense  of  two 
kinds,  frankmcense — the  simple  exudation  of  a 
shrub,  which  was  used  by  the  people  and  burnt  in 
the  court  of  the  tabernacle — and  ince^tse  or  sweet 
incense,  compounded  of  the  frankincense  and  of 
various  spices,  and  which  was  burnt  only  within  the 
sanctuary.  There  was  also  the  drink  offering,  of 
wine  or  ''  strong  drink,"  which  was  used  only  as  an 
accompaniment  of  the  other  sacrifices.  Most  of 
these  were  probably  used  as  offerings  before  the 
giving  of  the  law,  and  they  were  without  any  sepa- 
rate expiatory  significance.  The  single  case  where 
an  expiatory  offering  of  fine  flour  was  allowed 
comes  under  the  sin  offering. 

The  peace  offerings  of  the  earlier  ages  were  con- 
tinued and  systematically  arranged  under  the  law. 
They  were  the  most  common  of  all  the  sacrifices, 
*Lev.  i.  3,  lo,  14.  \Ib.  xxiii.  10. 


SACRIFICE.  119 

and  formed  the  basis  of  all  the  religious  feasts  of 
old.  The  victim  might  be  of  either  sex,  and  of  any 
kind  of  sacrificial  animal  except  birds,  which  were 
too  small  for  the  purpose.  The  blood  was  sprinkled 
on  the  altar,  the  fat  burned  there,  a  portion  given  to 
the  officiating  priest,  and  the  rest  consumed  by  the 
worshipper  in  a  feast  with  his  friends.  The  thanks- 
giving, the  vow,  and  the  voluntary  offerings  were 
subordinate  varieties  of  the  peace  offering.  The 
law  was  so  far  relaxed  in  regard  to  the  last  two  that 
they  might  be  eaten  also  on  the  second  day,*  and 
for  the  last  that  a  victim  might  be  accepted  having 
a  deficiency  or  redundancy  of  parts.f  In  the  peace 
offering,  as  in  the  other  sacrifices,  the  offerer  must 
personally  present  the  victim  J  and  slay  it,  after 
having  laid  his  hand  upon  its  head.  The  idea  of 
propitiation  was  less  prominent  in  this  than  in  the 
other  classes  of  animal  sacrifices ;  yet  that  it  was 
not  altogether  wanting  is  shown  by  the  sprinkling  of 
the  blood  upon  the  altar.  It  naturally  became  one 
of  the  most  common  sacrifices,  and  was  sometimes 
offered  in  enormous  numbers,  as  at  Solomon's  dedi- 
cation of  the  temple.  §  In  this  and  similar  cases  the 
provision  that  the  offerer  must  personally  lay  his 
hands  upon  the  head  of  the  victim  and  slay  it  him- 
self was  doubtless  neglected ;  but  even  then  it  was 
probably  done  to  a  few  of  the  victims  as  representa- 
tives of  the  whole.  The  peace  offering  was  always  pre- 
ceded by  the  sin  offering  when  both  were  offered  on 
the  same  day.  It  was  especially  the  sacrifice  of 
communion  with  God,  and  the  means  of  expressing 

*  Lev,  vii.  16, 17.     f /<5.  xxii.  23.     |  73.  vii.  29.      §  i  Kings,  viii.  63. 


I20  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

thanksgiving  for  His  mercies  or  supplication  for  His 
favors. 

The  sin  offering,  including  the  subdivision  of  the 
trespass  offering,  was  peculiar  to  the  law,  and  was 
the  most  distinctive  feature  of  its  whole  sacrificial 
system.  It  must  be  offered  by  every  Israelite  in- 
dividually when  he  had  sinned,  from  the  high-priest 
down,  and  also  in  a  very  remarkable,  form  for  the 
whole  people  collectively.  The  offerer  presented  and 
slew  the  victim  as  in  other  cases,  but  there  was  a 
difference  in  the  treatment  of  the  blood.  This  was 
ordinarily  to  be  put  upon  the  horns  of  the  altar  in 
the  court  of  the  tabernacle,*  but  when  the  offering 
was  for  the  high-priest  or  for  the  whole  congregation 
it  was  to  be  brought  into  the  sanctuary,  and  both 
sprinkled  before  the  veil  and  put  upon  the  horns  of 
the  altar  of  incense. t  On  the  great  day  of  atone- 
ment it  was  further  carried  by  the  high-priest  into 
the  holy  of  holies  and  sprinkled  upon  the  mercy  seat 
itself.:]:  The  disposition  of  the  flesh  of  the  victim  de- 
pended upon  this  treatment  of  a  portion  of  the  blood. 
In  all  cases  the  rest  of  the  blood  was  poured  out  at 
the  foot  of  the  altar,  and  the  fat  and  kidneys,  except 
with  the  bullock  and  the  goat  on  the  day  of  atone- 
ment, were  burned  upon  the  altar.  The  rest  of  the 
body  was  to  be  consumed  by  the  priests  in  a  holy 
place ;  but  if  a  portion  of  the  blood  had  been 
brought  within  the  sanctuary,  the  flesh  must  be  car- 
ried without  the  camp  and  there  burned.  The  bul- 
lock and  the  goat  of  the  day  of  the  atonement  must 
be  so  burned   whole  with  their  skin  and   all   that 

*  Lev.  iv.  25,  30.  \  lb.  6,  7,  17,  18.  %  lb.  xvi.  14,  15. 


SACRIFICE.  121 

belonged  to  them.  In  all  cases  the  priest  is  express- 
ly "to  make  an  atonement  for  the  offerer";  and 
the  word  thus  translated  means  literally  "  a  cover- 
ing"— by  the  sacrifice  there  was  effected  a  covering 
up  of  the  sins  of  him  who  offered  the  victim.  This 
victim  was  in  all  ordinary  cases  the  same,  and  was  a 
she-goat,  *  the  cheapest  of  all  domestic  animals  and 
easily  within  the  reach  of  almost  every  one.  It  was 
only  varied  where  it  could  be  done  without  violation 
of  the  principle  and  where  the  conspicuousness  of  the 
sinner  required  that  the  atonement  for  him  should 
be  especially  marked.  For  the  high-priest,  or  for 
the  whole  congregation  collectively,  the  victim  was 
a  bullock,f  on  the  day  of  atonement  a  bullock  and 
two  goats ;  for  a  ruler,  it  was  a  he-goat.  :j:  Corre- 
spondingly for  those  too  poor  to  afford  the  regu- 
lar offering,  a  pair  of  turtle  doves  or  two  young 
pigeons  ;  §  in  case  of  extreme  poverty,  fine  flour 
might  be  presented.  ||  With  this  necessary  allowance 
for  exceptional  cases,  the  sin  offering  was  always 
the  same  and  of  the  victim  which  could  be  most 
easily  procured.  It  is  especially  important  to  note 
that  no  variation  in  the  value  or  number  of  the 
victims  was  allowed  in  view  of  the  greatness  of  the 
sin.  For  the  most  heinous  and  the  lightest  offence 
the  offering  was  the  same.  Yet  the  offering  was 
only  permitted  for  what  are  called  "  sins  of  inadver- 
tence ;"  for  "presumptuous"  sins,  or  sins  "with  a  high 
hand,"  i.  e.  those  done  intentionally  and  with  purpose 
to  brave  the  Divine  wrath,  no  sacrifice  was  allowed. Tf 

*  Lev.  iv.  28.  f  lb.  iv.  3,  14.  %  lb.  iv.  23. 

§  lb.  V.  7.  I  lb.  V.  II.  If  Num.  xv.  30. 


122  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

The  trespass  offering  was  a  variety  of  the  sin 
offering  provided  for  transgressions  which  involved 
not  only  sin  but  harm  to  another,  whether  to  God  in 
the  things  of  His  sanctuary,  or  to  a  neighbor.  In  this 
case,  in  addition  to  the  offering,  which  must  in  all 
cases  be  a  ram,  compensation  must  be  made  for  the 
harm  done  with  the  addition  of  a  fifth  part  as  a 
fine.* 

Under  the  same  general  head  of  the  sin  offering 
must  be  placed  the  peculiar  sacrifice  of  the  red 
heifer,  to  which  allusion  is  made  in^  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews.f  A  red  heifer,  which  had  never  been 
yoked,  was  to  be  slain  by  the  high-priest  without 
the  camp.  After  sprinkling  her  blood  "  directly 
before  the  tabernacle  "  he  was  to  burn  her  whole 
body  with  "  cedar  wood  and  hyssop  and  scarlet," 
and  the  ashes  were  to  be  gathered  up  and  preserved. 
When  there  was  occasion,  some  of  this  was  to  be 
mingled  with  water  constituting  a  water  of  purifi- 
cation to  be  sprinkled  upon  the  unclean. :j: 

By  far  the  most  important  of  all  the  sin  offerings 
was  that  on  the  great  day  of  atonement,  the  only 
day  of  fasting  prescribed  by  the  law.  The  high- 
priest  was  first  to  offer  a  bullock  for  himself  and  for 
his  house,  and  bring  its  blood  within  the  veil  to 
sprinkle  it  before  and  upon  the  mercy  seat.§  He 
was  then  to  do  the  same  with  a  goat  for  a  sin  offer- 
ing for  the  people.  ||  After  this  he  was  to  take  of 
both  to  put  upon  the  altar  to  hallow  it  and  the  tab- 
ernacle. T    Finally,   he   was  to   take  another  goat, 

*  Lev.  V.  14 — vi.  7  f  Heb.  ix.  13.  %  Num.  xix, 

§  Lev.  xvi.  11-14.  Ij  lb.  15-17.  Tl  lb.  18-19. 


SACRIFICE.  123 

which  had  been  presented  to  the  Lord  at  the  same 
time  with  the  first,  and  selected  by  lot,"^  confess 
over  him  the  sins  of  the  people  and  send  him  off 
"by  the  hand  of  a  fit  man  into  the  wilderness."  f 
This  goat  is  the  one  known  in  our  version  as  "  the 
scape-goat,"  but  in  the  Hebrew  simply  "  the  goat 
for  Azazel,"  whatever  that  may  mean.  The  bodies 
of  the  other  goat  and  of  the  bullock,  after  their  fat 
had  been  burned  upon  the  altar,  :j:  were  to  be 
burned  without  the  camp.  §  In  all  cases  the  man 
who  burned  the  body  of  the  sin  offering  and  led 
away  the  goat  became  thereby  unclean  and  was 
obhged  to  wash  his  clothes  and  bathe  his  flesh.  || 

There  were  a  variety  of  offerings,  such  as  those 
for  the  cleansed  leper  and  others,  which  do  not  re- 
quire special  mention.  But  there  is  one  thing  im- 
portant to  be  observed  in  regard  to  all  sacrifices  : 
although  they  had,  and  could  have  no  intrinsic  effi- 
cacy for  the  forgiveness  of  moral  sin,  they  yet  did 
atone  for  mere  legal  and  ceremonial  defilements.  T 
They  had  therefore  a  certain  absolute  value. 

Before  speaking  of  the  relation  of  this  sacrificial 
system  to  the  New  Testament,  it  will  be  well  to  look 
for  a  moment  at  its  treatment  in  the  later  ages  of 
the  Old  Dispensation.  The  key-note  of  this  was 
struck  by  the  Prophet  Samuel  in  his  address  to  the 
vainglorious  Saul,  recognizing  the  obligation  of 
sacrifice,  but  pointing  to  something  still  more  im- 
portant:  "  Behold,  to  obey  is  better  than  sacrifice."*^ 
Very  similar  is  the  utterance  of  David,  the  pupil  of 

*  Lev.  xvi.  7,  8  f  lb,  20-22.  %  lb.  25.         §  lb.  27. 

II  lb.  26,  28.  ^  See  Heb.  ix.  13.  **  i  Sam.  xv.  22. 


124  THE   OLD   AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

the  prophet  and  the  successor  of  the  king :  "  Sacri- 
fice and  offering  thou  didst  not  desire ;  mine  ears 
hast  thou  opened  :  burnt  offering  and  sin  offering 
hast  thou  not  required.  Then  said  I,  Lo  I  come,  in 
the  volume  of  the  book  it  is  written  of  me,  I  dehght 
to  do  thy  will,  oh  my  God."  ^  For  while  this  utter- 
ance is  prophetic,  it  yet  expresses  the  Psalmist's 
own  inspired  view  of  the  comparative  value  of  sacri- 
fice and  obedience.  The  philosophic  Preacher  coun- 
sels :  "  Keep  thy  foot  when  thou  goest  to  the  house 
of  God,  and  be  more  ready  to  hear  than  to  give  the 
sacrifice  of  fools."  f  The  words  of  the  earliest  group 
of  prophets  whose  writings  have  been  preserved  to 
us  —  Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah,  and  Micah  —  are  very 
clear.  Amos  says  ;  "  Though  ye  offer  me  burnt  offer- 
ferings  and  your  meat  offerings,  I  will  not  accept 
them :  neither  will  I  regard  the  peace  offerings  of 
your  fat  beasts. ..  .But  let  judgment  run  down  as 
waters,  and  righteousness  as  a  mighty  stream."  J 
Hosea  : ''  They  sacrifice  flesh  for  the  sacrifices  of  mine 
offerings,  and  eat  it ;  but  the  Lord  accepteth  them 
not ;  now  will  He  remember  their  iniquity,"§,  etc. 
Isaiah  is  very  bold  and  saith  (at  the  beginning  of 
his  prophecies),  "  To  what  purpose  is  the  multitude 
of  your  sacrifices  unto  me  ?  saith  the  Lord  :  I  am 
full  of  the  burnt  offerings  of  rams,  and  the  fat  of  fed 
beasts,  and  I  delight  not  in  the  blood  of  bullocks,  or 
of  lambs,  or  of  he-goats ....  Wash  you,  make  you 
clean  ;  put  away  the  evil  of  your  doings,"  ||  etc. 
And  again  (at  the  very  end) :  "  He  that  killeth  an 

*  Ps.  xl.  6-8.  f  Eccl.  V.  I.  X  Amos,  v.  22,  24. 

§  Hos.  viii.  13.  I  Is.  i.  11. 


SACRIFICE.  125 

OX  is  as  if  he  slew  a  man  ;  he  that  sacrificeth  a  lamb, 
as  if  he  cut  off  a  dog's  neck ;  he  that  offereth  an  ob- 
lation, as  if  he  offered  swine's  blood  ;  he  that  offer- 
eth incense,  as  if  he  blessed  an  idol."*  Micah 
asks,  *'  Wherewith  shall  I  come  before  the  LORD, 
and  bow  myself  before  the  high  God  ?  shall  I  come 
before  Him  with  burnt  offerings,  with  calves  of  a 
year  old  ?  Will  the  Lord  be  pleased  with  thou- 
sands of  rams,  or  with  ten  thousands  of  rivers  of 
oil  ?  shall  I  give  my  firstborn  for  my  transgression, 
the  fruit  of  my  body  for  the  sin  of  my  soul  ?  He 
hath  shewed  thee,  oh  man,  what  is  good  ;  and  what 
doth  the  Lord  require  of  thee,  but  to  do  justly,  to 
love  mercy,  and  to  walk  humbly  with  thy  God."f 
In  the  period  just  before  the  captivity,  Jeremiah 
says  to  the  people,  '■'■  Your  burnt  offerings  are  not 
acceptable,  nor  your  sacrifices  sweet  unto  me.":j:  A 
certain  school  of  critics  would  fain  find  in  such  utter- 
ances a  struggle  against  the  whole  sacrificial  system 
before  the  Levitical  law  had  yet  been  established  ; 
but  this  cannot  be,  since  we  find  the  same  thing  in 
Malachi,  long  after,  even  on  their  theory,  the  Levit- 
ical system  had  been  established.  The  last  of  the 
prophets  still  speaks  in  the  same  strain  with  those 
who  had  gone  before.  Having  exposed  some  of  the 
iniquities  of  the  people,  he  continues  :  *'  The  LORD 
will  cut  off  the  man  that  doeth  this,  the  master  and 
the  scholar,  out  of  the  tabernacles  of  Jacob,  and  him 
that  offereth  an  offering  unto  the  Lord  of  hosts, 
and  this  have  ye  done  again,  covering  the  altar  of 
the  Lord  with  tears,  with  weeping,  and  with  crying 

*  Is.  Ixvi.  3.  f  Mic.  vi.  6-8.  %  Jer.  vi.  20. 


126  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

out,  insomuch  that  He  regardeth  not  the  offering 
any  more,  nor  receiveth  it  with  good  will  at  your 
hand."* 

These  sacrifices  had  been  divinely  commanded, 
and  at  times  the  people  were  sharply  reproved  for 
their  neglect,!  o^"  carelessness  in  their  offerings ;  :j: 
but  the  prophets  contended  against  an  unworthy 
and  perfunctory  performance  of  the  service  of  the 
Lord,  because  they  "  draw  near  me  with  their  mouth, 
and  with  their  lips  do  honor  me,  but  have  removed 
their  heart  far  from  me."  §  And  even  Malachi 
looks  forward  to  the  time  when  ''  from  the  rising  of 
the  sun  even  unto  the  going  down  of  the  same 
my  name  shall  be  great  among  the  Gentiles,  and  in 
every  place  incense  shall  be  offered  unto  my  name, 
and  a  pure  offering ;  "  ||  and  when  the  "  sons  of  Levi " 
shall  be  purified  *'  that  they  may  offer  unto  the  Lord 
an  offering  in  righteousness.  Then  shall  the  offering 
of  Judah  and  Jerusalem  be  pleasant  unto  the  Lord, 
as  in  the  days  of  old."  *f  Doubtless,  these  expres- 
sions are  to  be  interpreted  of  the  antitypes  of  the 
Gospel ;  but  it  may  be  doubted  whether  the  prophet 
himself  understood  the  figurative  character  of  his 
expressions,  and  at  all  events,  the  clothing  of  his 
predictions  in  the  language  of  these  sacrificial  types, 
shows  that  he  looked  upon  the  sacrifices  themselves 
as  good. 

The  prophets,  then,  must  have  regarded  the  sac- 
rifices as  divinely  commanded  and  capable  of  being 

*  Mai.  ii.  12,  13.  f  See  Hag.  i.  9-1 1  ;  Mai.   iii.  8. 

if  Mai.  i.  6-7.  §  Isa.   xxix.   13;  cf.  Matt.  xv.   8. 

11  Mai.  i.  II.  ^  lb.  iii.  3,  4. 


SACRIFICE.  127 

SO  used  as  to  constitute  an  acceptable  service  to 
God;  but  as  having  no  intrinsic  value  for  the  for- 
giveness of  sin,  and  utterly  worthless  when  dis- 
sociated from  the  true  service  of  the  heart.  In 
considering,  therefore,  their  relation  to  the  New 
Testament,  we  must  take  them  in  the  light  in  which 
they  are  presented  by  the  inspired  teachers  of  the 
Old  Dispensation,  and  not  in  the  mere  bare  and 
outward  letter  of  the  law.  Looking,  then,  upon  the 
sacrifices,  when  used  in  an  earnest  and  devout  spirit, 
as  the  means  provided  under  the  Old  Dispensation 
for  approach  to  God  and  communion  with  Him,  for 
the  forgiveness  of  sin  and  for  the  outward  suste- 
nance of  a  holy  life,  what  is  their  relation  to  the 
Gospel?  Much,  every  way.  First,  because  they 
brought  home  to  man  the  consciousness  of  sin. 
This  must  ever  be  the  starting-point  in  the  drawing 
near  of  fallen  man  to  an  all-holy  God.  Therefore,  \\\ 
that  full  setting  forth  of  the  way  of  salvation,  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans,  the  first  chapters  are  occu- 
pied with  the  abundant  proof  of  the  universal  sin- 
fulness of  man.  When  the  Israelites  are  compared 
with  the  heathen,  there  can  be  no  question  that  this 
sense  of  sinfulness  was  far  more  vividly  preserved 
among  the  former,  and  the  chief  means  whereby 
this  was  accomplished  was  the  sacrificial  system. 
Sacrifices  were  also  practised  by  the  heathen,  but 
the  same  effect  failed  to  be  produced  in  anything 
like  the  same  degree,  by  reason  of  the  very  different 
light  in  which  their  sacrifices  were  generally  re- 
garded. In  the  very  forefront,  then,  of  the  relations 
of  the   Old  Covenant,  through  its  sacrifices,  to  the 


128  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

New,  should  be  placed  the  awakening  and  keeping 
alive  of  the  sense  of  sin  and  of  the  need  of  forgiveness. 

The  holiness  of  God,  standing  over  against  the  sin 
of  man,  was  set  forth  in  every  pbssible  form  of  sym- 
bol and  of  direct  statement  both  in  the  laws  of  sac- 
rifice and  in  the  ordinances  of  the  tabernacle  and  of 
the  priesthood,  which  were  parts  of  the  sacrificial 
system.  It  is  only  necessary  to  compare  the  gross- 
ness  and  often  the  licentiousness  of  heathen  worship 
with  the  Hebrew  ritual  to  see  how  utterly  different 
must  have  been  the  ideas  of  the  Being  worshipped 
conveyed  to  the  mind  of  the  worshipper.  In  the 
one  He  was  a  Being  of  enormous  power  indeed,  but 
swayed  by  all  the  passions  and  even  the  sensual 
indulgences  of  man,  and  with  opposing  deities  of 
whom  he  was  jealous.  In  the  other  He  was  the 
sole  and  Almighty  Ruler,  who  could  be  approached 
only  in  the  recognition  of  His  absolute  purity  and 
holiness.  As  there  is  no  more  powerful  spring  of 
conduct  than  the  character  of  the  Being  to  whom 
we  are  responsible,  so  there  was  no  more  important 
preparation  for  the  Gospel  than  in  the  nature  and 
attributes  of  God  as  set  forth  in  the  sacrificial  sys- 
tem. Place  the  gods  of  Homer  or  of  the  later  Greek 
poets  by  the  side  of  the  Jehovah  of  Israel,  and  none 
can  fail  to  recognize  the  difference  which  must  have 
resulted  in  the  religious  ideas  of  the  people  trained 
under  the  two  systems. 

A  word  may  be  said  in  regard  to  the  unity  of  God 
as  declared  in  the  sacrificial  system,  because  this  has 
been  misunderstood  and  misrepresented.  In  the 
legislation  for  the  wilderness  this  was  emphatically 


SACRIFICE.  129 

taught  by  the  single  altar  to  which  all  sacrifices 
must  be  brought,  and  where  alone  sacrificial' worship 
could  be  accepted.  Similarly,  when  the  people  were 
on  the  eve  of  their  entrance  upon  the  promised 
land,  the  command  was  given  over  and  over  again, 
in .  every  form  of  emphatic  repetition,  that  they 
should  not  be  like  the  heathen  whom  they  replaced, 
but  should  have  one  central  sanctuary  in  "  the  place 
which  the  LORD  shall  choose  to  place  His  name 
there,"  ^  to  which  they  should  bring  all  their  offer- 
ings and  tithes,  to  which  the  Levites  should  resort 
for  their  service,  and  which  should  constitute  the 
visible  centre  of  their  worship  and  of  their  nation- 
ality founded  upon  that  worship.  The  critics  allege 
that  this  is  in  itself  proof  of  the  late  origin  of  these 
commands,  since,  in  flagrant  contrast  with  them,  the 
history  shows  sacrifices  offered  with  the  Divine  ap- 
proval at  a  great  variety  of  places,  as  at  Gilgal  and 
Ophrah,  Shiloh,  Bethlehem,  Gibeon  and  Ramah, 
Carmel  and  Jerusalem,  and  on  other  heights.  With- 
out stopping  to  notice  that  the  commands  objected 
to  are  found  only  in  Deuteronomy  (which  the  critics 
suppose  to  be  earlier  than  the  Levitical  legislation),! 

*  Deut.  xii.  5,  11, 14,  18,  26  ;  xiv.  23-25  ;  xv.  20  ;  xvi.  2,  6,  7,  15, 
16  ;  xvii.  8,  10  ;  xviii.  6  ;  xxvi.  2  ;  xxxi.  11  ;  Josh.  ix.  27. 

f  The  critics  meet  this  difficulty  by  supposing  that  Deuteronomy, 
belonging,  as  they  think,  to  the  age  of  Josiah,  was  written  at  a  time 
when  the  conflict  about  one  exclusive  central  sanctuary  was  fresh,  and 
therefore  naturally  inserted  these  laws,  while  "the  middle  books" 
were  composed  when  the  controversy  had  long  been  settled,  and  the 
necessity  of  inserting  such  provisions  was  forgotten.  This  explana- 
tion is  singular  and  itself  needs  explanation,  since,  on  the  supposition 
of  the  critics,  the  very  object  of  the  Levitical  legislation  was  to 
embody  the  results  of  the  successful  struggles  of  the  priestly  party. 
9 


130  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS, 

it  is  sufficient  to  remark  that  the  whole  difficulty 
arises  from  a  simple  misapprehension.  The  source 
of  authority  is  not  Himself  limited  by  the  restraints 
He  sees  fit  to  impose  upon  the  people.  Unquestion- 
ably He  limited  them  to  a  central  sanctuary;  but 
the  foundation  of  this  limitation  was  the  manifesta- 
tion of  His  presence.  If  now,  in  the  disorders  of 
the  times,  when  the  ark  was  separated  from  the 
tabernacle,  or  when  the  northern  kingdom  had  re- 
volted and  cast  off  His  worship,  He  in  mercy  vouch- 
safed to  manifest  His  presence  and  to  authorize 
sacrifices  in  other  places  than  the  one  He  had  ap- 
pointed, there  is  the  same  sanction  for  these  other 
places  as  for  the  one.  Yet  this  sanction  was  tempo- 
rary and  to  meet  an  occasional  necessity.  When 
the  people  established  a  permanent  worship  in  such 
places  they  were  severely  reproved.  Nevertheless, 
even  in  this  deviation  from  the  letter  of  the  law,  the 
principle  of  the  unity  of  God  was  always  most  firmly 
insisted  upon  ;  no  sacrifice  was  ever  countenanced 
except  in  such  places  as  the  one  Jehovah  had 
sanctioned. 

The  next  point  to  be  noted  in  the  sacrificial  sys- 
tem is  the  importance  everywhere  attached  to  the 
"shedding  of  blood."  Although,  as  already  said, 
this  principle  was  of  necessity  waived  in  the  sin 
offering  of  extreme  poverty,  yet  it  was  generally 
true,  and  strikingly  true,  that  *'  almost  all  things  are 
by  the  law  purged  with  blood  ;  and  without  shed- 
ding of  blood  is  no  remission."'^  This  was  common, 
also,  to  the  sacrifices  of  other  nations,  and  expressed 

*  Heb.  ix.  22. 


SACRIFICE.  131 

the  universal  conviction  of  mankind  that  the  forfeit- 
ure of  Hfe  was  the  necessary  penalty  of  sin,  and 
therefore  the  condition  of  man's  forgiveness.  It 
was  something,  however,  to  have  this  established  by 
the  revealed  will  of  God,  placing  it  upon  a  basis  of 
authority  and  certainty.  Herein  is  perhaps  the  most 
important  point  of  all  in  the  relation  of  the  two  Dis- 
pensations. God  is  not  only  merciful,  but  righteous. 
He  loves  man  and  would  receive  him  to  Himself; 
but,  that  He  may  be  consistent  with  Himself,  His 
outraged  law  must  be  vindicated,  and  vindicated  by 
that  suffering  which  is  the  eternally  established  pen- 
alty of  sin.  Under  the  law  it  was  only  possible  that 
this  should  be  set  forth  in  type  and  shadow ;  but 
those  types  were  made  as  significant  and  instructive 
as  the  nature  of  the  case  allowed. 

United  with  this,  and  giving  force  to  its  teaching, 
was  the  provision  that  the  sacrifice  must  be  the  per- 
sonal act  of  the  worshipper.  No  proxy,  no  vicarious 
confession  and  worship  were  allowed.  The  offerer 
must  himself  lay  his  hand  on  the  victim's  head  and 
slay  it.  It  need  not  be  said  how  fundamental  to 
all  religion  is  this  personal  relation  between  the  sin- 
ner and  his  God.  It  is  a  principle  continually  vio- 
lated in  all  false  religions  and  in  some  corruptions  of 
the  true.  It  can  hardly  be  necessary  to  guard  this 
remark  by  saying  that  it  does  not  apply  to  uncon- 
scious infants  brought  by  circumcision  or  by  baptism 
into  the  fold  of  God's  Church  of  covenanted  grace ; 
nor  to  intercessory  prayer  for  others.  In  both  cases, 
by  God's  appointment,  the  influences  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  may  be  won  for  those  we  love ;  but  the  issue 


132  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

of  those  influences,  the  reconciliation  of  the  sinner 
to  his  Maker,  must  finally  depend,  by  an  immutable 
law  of  congruity,  upon  the  condition  of  his  own 
heart. 

The  character  of  the  offerer  was  another  essential 
condition  of  all  acceptable  sacrifice.  It  has  already 
been  noticed  that  no  offering  was  allowed  for  sins 
done  "  with  a  high  hand."  They  were  provided 
only  for  those  who,  through  weakness,  inadvertence 
and  temptation,  had ''been  overtaken  in  a  fault." 
The  offerer  must  recognize  his  sin;  must  seek  recon- 
ciliation with  God,  and  desire  an  atonement  for  his 
transgression. 

Yet,  even  thus,  under  the  law,  atonement  was 
only  to  be  obtained  by  the  intervention  of  the  ap- 
pointed priest.  He  it  was,  and  not  the  worshipper, 
who  must  sprinkle  the  blood  upon  the  altar.  This 
was  one  of  the  innumerable  ways  in  which  the  law 
taught  "  that  the  way  into  the  holiest  of  all  was  not 
yet  made  manifest."  Sinful  man  can  never  draw 
near  to  God  except  through  a  mediator ;  and  while 
the  one  true  and  only  Mediator  was  not  yet  re- 
vealed, these  appointed  types  must  stand  between 
man  and  God,  to  set  forth  the  necessity  of  this 
bridge  over  the  otherwise  impassable  chasm.  The 
separation  between  sin  and  holiness  is  not  less  than 
between  the  finite  and  the  Infinite.  In  both  the 
terms  are  incommensurable,  and  can  only  be  brought 
into  relation  by  a  mediator.  It  is  common  to  talk 
of  the  "boundless  goodness"  of  God,  as  though  He 
were  ready  to  receive  and  have  mercy  upon  all, 
without  regard  to  character  or  to  the  use  of  His  ap- 


SACRIFICE.  133 

pointed  means ;  but  a  higher  authority  has  said, 
"No  man  cometh  unto  the  Father  but  by  Me;"  *  and 
this  necessity  of  a  mediator  in  all  our  approach  to 
God  was  typically  set  forth  in  the  requirement  of  an 
intervening  priest  to  make  the  atonement. 

A  further  point  taught  by  the  sacrificial  system 
was  the  equality  of  all  men  before  God.  This  has 
been  mentioned  in  a  former  lecture,  as  set  forth 
in  various  ways  under  the  law ;  but  most  emphat- 
ically was  it  declared  in  requiring  offerings  for  sin 
from  all,  and  as  far  as  the  nature  of  the  case  allowed, 
the  same  offering  from  every  man,  and  precisely 
the  same  ritual  in  every  case.  The  law  recognized 
no  difference  between  the  powerful  and  the  weak, 
the  rich  and  the  humble.  Only  official  responsi- 
bility in  the  one  case,  and  extreme  poverty  in 
the  other,  allowed  necessary  difference  in  the  vic- 
tim. Equality  was  as  strongly  asserted  as  it 
could  be. 

The  same  fact  shows  that  in  the  Hebrew  sacrifices 
the  idea  was  totally  excluded  of  a  quid  pro  quo,  of  a 
compensation  offered  to  God  for  the  sin  committed 
against  Him — an  idea  very  prominent  in  the  heath- 
en sacrifices,  where  the  victims  were  increased  in 
number  and  value  as  the  sin  to  be  atoned  for  rose  in 
greatness,  even  to  the  extent  of  offering  human  vic- 
tims. Among  the  Israelites  nothing  of  this  kind 
was  allowed.  The  peace  offerings,  designed  for  a 
sacrificial  feast,  might  be  indefinitely  multiplied  as 
occasion  required  ;  but  for  the  sin  offering  only  that 
which  the   law  prescribed  could  be   sacrificed.     In 

*  John,  xiv.  6. 


134  THE   OLD  AXD   NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

this  fact,  that  the  same  single  victim  *  must  atone 
alike  for  the  greatest  and  the  smallest  sin,  it  was 
plainly  shown  that  it  was  not  in  the  victim  itself  to 
atone  for  the  transgression.  The  heathen  idea,  that 
by  this  means  an  equivalent  was  offered  to  God, 
and  He  must,  therefore,  in  common  justice,  forgive 
the  sinner,  was  entirely  excluded.  Forgiveness  re- 
mained among  the  Hebrews  the  free  and  gracious 
act  of  God  ;  sacrifice  was  His  appointed  means  of 
seeking  this  blessing.  Why  He  should  have  ap- 
pointed it,  and  how  it  was  efficacious,  were  questions 
they  may  not  have  raised,  and  certainly  could  not 
have  solved  ;  but  that  the  power  was  not  in  the 
value  of  the  sacrifice  itself  was  plain,  when  all  sins 
of  every  degree  had  the  same  atonement. 

Finally,  the  insufficiency  of  sacrifice  itself  for  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  was  shown  in  two  ways,  both 
of  which  are  pointed  out  in  the  argument  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  In  the  first  place,  there 
was  a  constant  repetition.  This  might  possibly  be 
alleged  as  required  by  the  constant  repetition  of  the 
sin.  The  worshippers  were  forgiven,  but  sinning 
again,  needed  a  fresh  atonement.  Even  this  would 
show  that  the  sacrifices  were  only  effectual  as  against 
some  particular  sin,  and  not  against  that  which  most 
sorely  presses  upon  man,  his  sinful  condition,  the 
alienation  of  his  heart  from  God.  But  a  perfect  atone- 
ment, even  in  this  limited  sense,  would  be  too  much  to 
allow  to  them.  "  The  law  ....  can  never  with  those 
sacrifices  which  they  offered  year  by  year  continual- 
ly make  the  comers  thereunto  perfect.  For  then 
*  Lev.  iv.  28. 


SACRIFICE.  135 

would  they  not  have  ceased  to  be  offered,  because 
that  the  worshippers  once  purged  should  have  had 
no  more  conscience  of  sins.  But  in  those  sacrifices 
there  is  a  remembrance  again  made  of  sins  every 
year."  *  And  then  the  contrast  is  drawn  between 
these  and  Him  who  ''  after  He  had  offered  one  sacri- 
fice for  ever,  sat  down  on  the  right  hand  of  God  .... 
For  by  one  offering  He  hath  perfected  forever  them 
that  are  sanctified. f  The  recognized  insufficiency  of 
the  sacrifices  of  old  taught  plainly  the  need  of  the 
sufficient  Sacrifice,  and  the  primeval  promise  made 
sure  that  it  would  come. 

The  other  way  in  which  the  insufficiency  of  the 
sacrifices  was  shown  was  of  a  different  kind,  and 
one  which  perhaps  appealed  only  to  the  more 
thoughtful  and  devout.  It  was  in  the  inherent  want 
of  congruity  between  the  means  and  the  end  ;  in  the 
want  of  any  relation  between  the  life  of  the  brutes 
and  human  transgression.  "  It  is  not  possible,"  the 
Apostle  argues,  "  that  the  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats 
should  take  away  sins."  :j;  Something  further  and 
more  was  needed  ;  and  it  was  because  the  people 
did  not  see  this,  but  were  disposed  to  trust  implicitly 
to  their  sacrifices,  that  the  sacred  writers  of  old 
spoke  of  them  in  the  terms  which  have  been  quoted. 
It  is  true  that  they  simply  require  that  the  sacrifices 
should  be  offered  in  an  honest  and  good  heart,  in 
humble  submission  to  God  and  earnest  effort  to  do 
His  will.  And  it  is  also  true  that  the  saints  of  old 
who  offered  their  sacrifices  in  this  spirit,  were  accept- 
ed and  forgiven.     But  this  was  not  on  the  ground  of 

*  Heb.  X.  1-3.  f  lb.  12-14.  X  lb.  ^. 


136  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

the  sufficiency  of  the  sacrifices  ;  it  was  because  they 
had  faith  in  God's  promises,  and  sought  His  forgive- 
ness in  the  way  of  His  appointment,  although  that 
way  was  obviously  inadequate  and  derived  its  only 
efficacy  from  the  Divine  command.  If  in  any  way 
the  Divine  righteousness  was  to  be  vindicated  in  the 
forgiveness  of  the  sinner,  if  any  true  atonement  was 
to  be  made  for  sin,  it  must  evidently  be  in  some  way 
not  yet  revealed. 

After  this  somewhat  full  statement  of  the  purpose 
and  design  of  the  sacrificial  cultus,  its  place  in  the 
relations  between  the  Old  and  New  Dispensations  is 
apparent  without  further  discussion.  The  sacrifices 
were  educational  in  that  they  set  forth  the  purity, 
the  majesty,  and  the  holiness  of  God  and  the  sinful- 
ness of  man.  They  taught  man  that  he  could  draw 
nigh  to  his  Maker  only  through  the  forgiveness  of 
his  sin,  and  that  this  forgiveness  must  be  obtained 
by  the  sacrifice  of  life  and  the  intervention  of  an 
authorized  mediator.  They  were  preparatory  in 
showing  that  personal  act  and  personal  character 
were  the  necessary  conditions  of  forgiveness,  and  he 
who  was  forgiven  and  brought  into  communion  with. 
God  must  needs  live  a  life  in  accordance  with  God's 
will.  Above  all  they  were  typical,  in  that  they  bore 
upon  their  very  forefront  the  impress  of  their  own 
insufficiency,  and  thus  pointed  forward  to  some 
means  yet  to  be  revealed  when  the  "  Seed  of  the 
woman  "  should  come  to  crush  the  power  of  evil. 
There  is  no  meaning  in  the  sacrifices  of  old  except 
in  the  light  of  the  cross ;  and  we  gain  much  help 
in  understanding  Christ's  sacrifice   by  the  illustra- 


SACRIFICE,  137 

tions  furnished  in  these  typical  offerings.  Through 
them  we  are  enabled  to  recognize  Him  as  "the 
Lamb  of  God  that  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the 
world."  * 

*  John,  i.  29,  36. 


LECTURE  VI. 

THE    PRIESTHOOD. 

Priesthood  and  sacrifice  are  correlative  terms. 
There  may  indeed  be  sacrifice  without  an  appointed 
priesthood,  as  in  all  things  the  function  is  more  gen- 
eral than  the  organ  especially  set  apart  for  its  dis- 
charge ;  but  as  we  are  taught  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  there  can  be  no  priesthood  without  sacri- 
fice, *  since  otherwise  the  office,  having  no  object  to 
serve,  would  cease. 

During  the  early  ages  of  mankind  we  have  seen 
that  sacrifices  were  offered,  and  yet  there  was  no 
other  appointed  priest  than  the  head  of  the  family, 
in  this,  as  in  all  other  things  the  representative  of 
those  dependent  upon  him.  As  the  family  devel- 
oped into  the  tribe,  the  two  offices  of  prince  and 
priest  were  not  at  first  separated  but  remained 
united  in  the  same  person,  as  in  the  instances  of 
Melchisedec  -j-  and  of  Jethro  ;  ^  so  also  Balak,  as  king 
of  the  Moabites,  joined  with  the  Prophet  Balaam  in 
offering  sacrifices  for  his  people.  §  When  the  tribe 
had  further  developed  into  a  considerable  nation,  it 
became  manifestly  impracticable  for  the  monarch, 
with  his  many  occupations,  actually  to  officiate  as 

*Heb.  V.  I  ;  viii.  i,  2.  f  Gen.  xiv.  i8. 

X  Ex.  iii.  I  ;  xviii.  12.  §  Num.  xxii.-xxiv. 


THE  PRIESTHOOD.  139 

the  one  universal  priest  of  his  nation,  and  therefore, 
as  in  Egypt,  a  permanent  order  of  priests  was  estab- 
lished with  a  high-priest  for  each  particular  deity, 
but  yet  the  monarch  remained  at  the  head  of  the 
whole  hierarchy,  the  great  high-priest  of  the  whole 
kingdom. 

In  Israel,  the  ancient  Church  of  God,  the  case  was 
different.  There  was  no  king  in  the  original  consti- 
tution of  this  commonwealth,  and,  as  we  have  seen, 
there  was  at  first  no  priesthood.  The  people  were  tcr 
be  under  the  direct  government  of  God,  and  were  to 
be  "  a  kingdom  of  priests,  and  an  holy  nation."  * 
Accordingly  in  the  first  sacrifice  that  was  appointed, 
the  Passover,  each  head  of  a  family  was  made  the 
officiating  priest.  They  miserably  failed  to  fulfil 
their  high  vocation,  and  although  the  institution  of 
the  monarchy  was  deferred  for  some  centuries,  it 
became  necessary  that  the  people  should  at  once 
have  some  one,  as  they  had  desired,  4:o  stand  between 
themselves  and  God,  and  accordingly  the  Aaronic 
order  of  priests  was  consecrated.  This  continued 
ever  after  a  separate  and  distinct  order,  from  whose 
functions — nothwithstanding  the  assertions  often 
made  to  the  contrary — the  monarchs  were  emphati- 
cally excluded,  and  any  attempt  upon  their  part 
to  assume  them  was  most  severely  marked  by  the 
Divine  displeasure,  f  Thus  came  about  the  first  in- 
stance in  history  of  the  separation  of  the  functions 
of  the  priesthood  and  the  monarch,  of  Church  and 
State.  Later,  for  a  time  in  the  period  of  the  Mac- 
cabees, the  supreme  civil   and   ecclesiastical  offices 

*  Ex.  xix.  5.       f  I  Sam.  xiii.  10-14  5  2  Chron.  xxvi.  i6-2i. 


140  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

were  united  in  the  same  person ;  but  this  was 
because  the  priests,  through  stress  of  circumstances, 
temporarily  absorbed  the  royal  prerogative,  not  by 
reason  of  the  kings  assuming  priestly  functions. 

With  the  Sinaitic  legislation  a  distinct  order  of 
priests  were  divinely  appointed.  Two  points  are  es- 
pecially to  be  noted  in  regard  to  them :  first,  that 
their  appointment  was  directly  from  God  Himself.* 
This  fact  is  everywhere  insisted  upon  and  was  essen- 
tial to  the  value  of  their  office.  They  were  in  no 
sense  appointed  by  the  people,  and  had  they  been 
so,  they  could  not  have  acted  authoritatively  as  medi- 
ators between  God  and  the  people.  It  has  already 
appeared  that  the  Levitical  sacrifices  had  no  in- 
trinsic efficacy  for  the  forgiveness  of  moral  sin,  but 
derived  their  whole  value  from  the  Divine  appoint- 
ment, and  the  same  thing  is  to  be  said  of  the  priest- 
hood. The  priests  themselves  needed  atonement, 
and  were  obliged  to  offer  for  their  own  sins ;  yet  by 
the  prescribed  unction  they  were  constituted  accept- 
able intercessors  and  mediators  for  the  people.  All 
was  from  God  ;  and  while  this  gave  assurance  to  the 
people  in  their  daily  worship,  the  priest's  own  im- 
perfection showed  that  the  true  reconciliation  with 
God  by  the  restoration  of  holiness  to  man  had  not 
yet  been  manifested.  The  Seed  of  the  woman  who 
should  bruise  the  serpent's  head  could  only  be  typi- 
fied, not  realized,  by  the  Levitical  priests.  Yet  this 
very  imperfection  in  another  way  secured  for  them 
a  qualification  which  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  urges  as  essential,  that  the  high-priest 

*  Comp.  Heb.  v.  4. 


THE  PRIESTHOOD.  I4I 

should  be  able  "  to  have  compassion  on  the  igno- 
rant and  on  them  that  are  out  of  the  way  ;  for  that 
he  himself  also  is  compassed  with  infirmity."  "^  It 
was  essential,  then,  to  their  office  that  they  should 
have  authority,  and  to  its  rightful  discharge  that 
they  should  have  sympathy  with  those  for  whom 
they  ministered. 

The  fundamental  object  of  their  office  was,  as  re- 
peatedly declared,  "  to  draw  near  to  God,"  f  on  be- 
half of  the  people.  They  were  to  do  this  chiefly  by 
offering  sacrifices  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  and 
they  thus  sustained  a  distinct  mediatorial  character 
between  God  and  His  people.  This  appears  in  every 
part  of  the  law  concerning  them.  The  golden  plate 
inscribed  "  holiness  unto  the  Lord  "  which  the  high- 
priest  wore  upon  his  brow,  was  expressly  declared  to 
mean  that  he  should  "  bear  the  iniquity  of  the  holy 
things  which  the  children  of  Israel  shall  hallow,"  J  and 
the  flesh  of  the  sin  offerings  was  given  to  the  priests 
**  to  bear  the  iniquity  of  the  congregation,  to  make 
atonement  for  them  before  the  Lord."§  The  ritual 
of  the  sin  offering  in  the  case  of  the  whole  congre- 
gation, of  the  ruler,  and  of  one  of  the  common 
people  closes  with  the  declaration,  *'  and  the  priest 
shall  make  an  atonement  for  them  and  it  shall  be 
forgiven  them."  || 

From  this  primary  and  essential  duty  of  the 
priests  naturally  followed  many  others  of  a  second- 
ary character.     They  had  the  care  of  the  sanctuary, 

*  Heb.  V,  2.         f  Lev.  vii.  35  ;  x.  3  ;  xxi.  17  ;  Num  xvi.  5,  etc. 
X  Ex.  xxviii.  38.  §  Lev.  x.  17. 

I  Lev.  iv.  20,  26,  31,  35  ;  v.  10,  13. 


142  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

the  especial  charge  of  the  copy  of  the  law,  of  the 
instruction  of  the  people,  and  many  other  things, 
which  all  grew  out  of  their  primary  office,  and  need 
not  here  be  considered.  But  it  is  important  to  bear 
in  mind  that  their  one  essential  function,  that  for 
which  their  office  was  instituted,  was  to  stand  as 
mediators  between  God  and  the  people,  and  to  make 
atonement  for  their  sins  by  means  of  sacrifice.  Of 
course,  from  the  very  nature  of  these  sacrifices,  and 
from  their  own  nature,  too,  they  could  do  this  but 
symbolically,  and  they  were  appointed  until  the 
great  and  true  High-Priest  should  come,  Who  by 
His  one  all-sufficient  sacrifice  "  hath  perfected  for- 
ever them  that  are  sanctified."  "^ 

This  brings  us  at  once  to  the  relation  between  the 
old  and  the  new  Dispensations  as  involved  in  the 
priesthood.  The  priests,  like  the  sacrifices,  were 
types  of  Christ ;  that  is,  they  set  forth,  in  imperfect 
and  insufficient  acts,  that  which  He  alone  could 
really  accomplish.  This  whole  relation  is  so  fully 
wrought  out  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  that  it 
cannot  be  necessary  to  dwell  very  much  upon  it.  Only 
there  are  certain  features  of  Christ's  priesthood  in 
relation  to  the  Levitical,  and  also  in  relation  to  the 
general  functions  of  all  possible  priesthood,  brought 
out  in  that  epistle,  which  it  is  desirable  to  have 
clearly  in  mind. 

The  first  of  these  is  its  superiority  to  the  Aaronic 
priesthood.  This  is  shown  by  various  satisfactory 
proofs,  familiar  to  us,  of  which  only  one  is  especially 
connected  with  the  present  subject,  viz. :  That  the 

*   Heb.  X,  14 


THE  PRIESTHOOD,  143 

Aaronic  priesthood  was  temporary,  while  that  of 
Christ  summed  up  in  itself  all  other  priesthood,  and 
is  everlasting,  so  that  there  neither  is  nor  ever  can 
be  any  other  priesthood  in  the  original  sense  of 
that  word.  The  declarations  on  this  point  are  very 
specific.  His  perpetual  priesthood  results  from  the 
whole  comparison  drawn  between  Him  and  Mel- 
chisedec,  and  from  the  statement  that  ''He  is  able 
to  save  them  to  the  uttermost  that  come  unto  God 
by  Him,  seeing  He  ever  liveth  to  make  intercession 
for  them;"*  and  that  He  is  a  Priest  "after  the 
power=of  an  endless  life  ;"  f  and  again,  that  He  "  is 
consecrated  for  evermore,"  J  and  that  He  is  "  a 
priest  for  ever."  §  That  His  priesthood  is  a  finality 
necessarily  results  from  this  argument ;  for  He  being 
a  perfect  and  eternal  High-Priest,  how  can  there  be 
occasion  for  any  other?  It  is  not,  however,  allowed 
to  rest  here.  We  know  that,  as  is  urged  in  this 
epistle,  II  there  can  be  no  priest  without  he  "  have 
somewhat  to  offer,"  or,  as  it  has  already  been  ex- 
pressed, priest  and  sacrifice  are  correlative  terms,  so 
that  there  can  be  no  priest  without  a  sacrifice.  If 
there  be  one  point  which,  more  than  any  other,  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  labors  to  make  clear  and 
emphatic,  it  is  that  Christ's  sacrifice  was  complete 
and  perfect,  offered  once  for  all  and  admitting  of  no 
other.  "  By  one  sacrifice  He  hath  perfected  forever 
them  that  are  sanctified  ;"  T  He  "needethnot  daily, 
as  those  high-priests,  to  offer  up  sacrifice  .  .  .  .  ; 
for  this   He    did    once,  when  He   offered   up   Him- 

*  Heb.  vii.  25.  f  lb.  ver.  16.  %  lb.  ver.  28. 

§  V.  6  ;  vii.  21.  |  viii.  3.  Tf  x.  14. 


144         THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

self  ;  "  *  ''  He  entered  in  once  into  the  Holy  Place, 
having  obtained  eternal  redemption  for  us  ;  "f  "  now 
once  in  the  end  of  the  world  hath  He  appeared  to  put 
away  sins  by  the  sacrifice  of  Himself ; "  if  "  we  are 
sanctified  by  the  offering  of  the  body  of  Jesus  Christ 
once  for  all ; "  §  *'  this  man,  after  He  had  offered  one 
sacrifice  for  sins  for  ever,  sat  down  on  the  right 
hand  of  God."  ||  To  quote  all  the  passages  having 
the  same  significance,  would  be  to  quote  a  consider- 
able part  of  the  epistle.  The  whole  is  admirably 
summed  up  in  the  teaching  of  our  own  Church  in 
her  communion  office,  saying  of  Christ's  death  upon 
the  cross,  **  Who  made  there  (by  His  one  oblation 
of  Himself  once  offered)  a  full,  perfect,  and  sufficient 
sacrifice,  oblation  and  satisfaction  for  the  sins  of  the 
whole  world." 

If,  then,  the  priesthood  of  old  could  only  be  typi- 
cal because  it  lacked  power  to  be  more,  that  of 
Christ,  because  it  was  all-sufficient  and  effective,  was 
complete  and  final.  As  there  can  be  no  sacrifice 
beyond  His,  so  there  can,  in  the  nature  of  things,  be 
no  further  priesthood.  He  has  accomplished  all 
that  was  to  be  done ;  there  is  nothing  for  another 
to  do,  nor,  if  there  were,  is  there  any  other  who  has 
power  for  its  doing. 

Just  here  it  may  be  well  to  make  a  moment's  di- 
gression lest  the  Christian  use  of  the  term  priest  for 
the  officers  of  the  Church,  and  of  sacrifice  in  connec- 
tion with  its  chief  sacrament,  should  seem  to  militate 
against  the  position  here  taken.  As  early  as  the 
time  of  Cyprian,  that  is  in  the  middle  of  the  third 

*  Heb.  vii.  27.         \  ix.  12.         %  ix.  26.         §  x.  10.          |  x.  12. 


THE  PRIESTHOOD.  145 

century,  the  distinctive  Greek  word  iox priest,  lepev?, 
came  to  be  applied  first  to  the  Bishop,  and  then  to 
the  Presbyters.  This  was  natural,  since  in  all  the 
communities  in  which  Christians  lived  the  title  of 
those  who  conducted  religious  services  was  univer- 
sally "  the  priest,"  and  they  assimilated  the  name, 
just  as,  in  an  opposite  way,  the  rabbis  in  Jewish 
synagogues  now  are  popularly  called  **  ministers"  or 
"  clergymen,"  and  this  was  the  more  readily  done 
because  the  religious  minister  throughout  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures  was  the  priest.  But  the  name 
did  not  carry  with  it  the  thing  signified  by  the 
name,  and  not  until  the  theology  of  the  Church  had 
become  deeply  corrupted  was  it  ever  imagined  that 
the  function  of  the  Christian  priest  was  to  offer  pro- 
pitiatory sacrifice. 

Similarly  the  name  "  sacrifice  "  came  to  be  associ- 
ated with  the  eucharist,  as  with  every  other  outward 
act  of  devotion,  with  prayer,  and  thanksgiving,  and 
alms,  and  perhaps  still  more  readily  with  this  as  the 
memorial  of  the  one  great  Sacrifice,  offered  once  for 
all ;  but  with  no  thought  that  this  sacrament  was  a 
sacrifice  in  the  strict  and  proper  sense  of  the  word, 
as  an  atonement  for  sin.  But  naturally  and  easily 
as  these  terms  came  to  be  thus  used,  it  is  not  to  be 
forgotten  that  even  such  a  use  of  them  is  most 
scrupulously  avoided  throughout  the  Nev/  Testa- 
ment. Frequently  as  the  term  lepevi  is  used  of  the 
Levitical  priests,  often  as  it  is  applied  to  our  Lord, 
and  sometimes  to  the  whole  body  of  His  followers, 
it  is  never  once  used,  nor  any  derivative  or  cognate 
word,  of  the  Christian  ministry.     They  are   called 


146  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

presbyters,  prophets,  teachers,  leaders  {f/yov^iroi)^ 
ministers,  bishops  or  overseers,  but  never  priests.'^ 
So,  also,  often  as  the  word  *'  sacrifice "  is  used, 
whether  of  the  bloody  sacrifices  of  old  or  of  the  fig- 
urative sacrifices  of  alms  and  prayer  and  praise,  and 
often  as  the  Lord's  Supper  is  mentioned,  directly  or 
in  allusions,  the  two  terms  are  never  brought  to- 
gether, nor  is  the  chief  sacrament  of  our  religion 
ever  described  in  sacrificial  language.f  The  inspired 
writers  were  deeply  impressed  with  the  all-sufiicient 
and  final  character  both  of  our  Lord's  sacrifice  and 
of  His  priesthood.  If  another  use  of  terms  has  since 
come  into  vogue,  and  if,  through  stress  of  circum- 
stances, any  of  us  be  led  to  adopt  this  later  usage, 
care  needs  to  be  exercised  lest  with  the  terms  should 
come  back  the  idea  of  atonement  which,  once  per- 
fectly accomplished,  can  never  be  repeated. 

To  return :  but  a  word  more  need  be  said  of  the 
relations  of  the  two  Dispensations  as  shown  in  the 
Priesthood.  It  is  evident  that  the  earlier  was  pre- 
paratory for  the  later,  and  the  later  was  the  designed 
completion  of  the  earlier;  but  it  is  particularly  to  be 
noted  that  this  is  true,  not  merely  in  a  chronological, 

*  In  Rom.  XV.  16,  St.  Paul  speaks  of  himself  as  ispovpyovvra  to 
EvayviXiot^  in  order  that  there  might  be  an  acceptable  TTpodcpofjd 
of  the  Gentiles.  But  this  word  is  derived  not  from  i£psv<^,  but  from 
iEftoi,  and  would  be  accurately  translated  "making  a  sacred  ser- 
vice." Besides,  the  whole  passage  is  highly  figurative,  and  even  if 
referred  to  priestly  service,  could  be  so  only  in  the  same  sense  in 
which  the  Gentiles  are  called  "  a  sacrifice." 

f  Heb.  xiii.  10 — "we  have  an  altar" — has  sometimes  been  re- 
ferred to  in  this  connection  ;  but  the  context  shows  that  whether 
Bvdiadrijpiov  be  here  taken  of  the  cross  or  of  Christ,  it  cannot  refer 
directly  to  the  Eucharist. 


THE  PRIESTHOOD.  1 47 

but  also  In  a  logical  sense.  It  is  not  merely  that  the 
Levitical  priests  were  before  Christ  in  point  of  time ; 
but  the  essential  nature  of  the  priesthood,  in  obtain- 
ing the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  the  reconciliation  of 
man  to  God  by  an  authorized  mediatorship  founded 
upon  the  sacrifice  of  life,  was  so  set  forth  in  their 
prescribed  functions,  that  only  by  a  careful  and 
thorough  study  of  these  can  we  reach  any  true  idea 
of  the  priesthood  of  Christ.  And  Christ's  priesthood 
is  one  of  the  chief  points  of  the  New  Testament 
teaching.  It  remains,  therefore,  that  the  Levitical 
law  was  not  only  to  the  Jews  a  temporary  and  typi- 
cal substitute  for  the  Gospel  and  a  preparation  for 
Christianity;  but  its  study  continues  in  all  ages  to  be 
to  the  Christian  the  indispensable  means  of  under- 
standing the  fundamental  teaching  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament. On  the  other  hand  this  teaching  of  the 
New  Testament  throws  back  its  light  over  the  insti- 
tutions of  the  Old,  and  shows  to  all  who  have  eyes 
to  see  that  these  could  not  have  been  of  mere  human 
invention  and  development ;  but  rest  on  the  com- 
mand of  Him  who  saw  the  end  from  the  beginning, 
and  ordained  all  in  harmony  for  the  purpose  of  lead- 
ing fallen  man  as  fast  and  as  far  as  he  was  able  to 
bear,  in  the  way  of  eternal  salvation. 

The  supreme  function  of  the  Jewish  priesthood  was 
on  the  great  day  of  Atonement,  when  the  high-priest, 
sheltered  by  the  cloud  of  incense  from  the  golden 
censer,  passed  within  the  veil  and  presented  the 
blood  of  his  sacrifice  before  the  Mercy-seat.  This 
was  the  culmination  of  his  symbolical  work  of  atone- 
ment :  for  that  did  not  end  with  the  sacrifice,  but 


148  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

was  continued  and  completed  in  the  presentation  of 
the  blood  before  the  symbolical  dwelling-place  of  the 
Most  High.  These  things,  like  every  part  of  the 
sacrificial  system,  had  their  significance,  and  pointed 
to  truths  which  should  be  fulfilled  in  the  substance 
when  the  shadow  had  passed  away.  For  it  is  to  be 
remembered  that  while  the  great  sacrifice  of  our 
Lord's  priesthood  was  accomplished  once  for  all,  so 
that  there  can  be  no  other  sacrifice  in  the  proper 
sense  of  that  word;  yet  it  is  declared  He  "  abideth 
a  Priest  forever"  and  "ever  liveth  to  make  inter- 
cession for"  us.*  The  consequences  of  His  sacrifice 
are  permanent.  The  intercession  based  upon  that 
sacrifice  continues  forever  as  the  ground  of  our  hope 
of  salvation,  and  can  be  offered  in  its  priestly  sig- 
nificance only  by  Him  who  was  Himself  the  sacrifice 
which  He  offered  once  for  all  for  our  redemption. 
He  is  our  only  and  our  perpetual  Priest. 

*  Heb.  vii.  25. 


LECTURE  VII. 

THE   KINGDOM   OF  GOD. 

The  form  of  government  among  the  people  of  the 
Old  Dispensation  has  an  important  bearing  upon  the 
relations  between  that  dispensation  and  the  New, 
as  furnishing  the  language  embodying  the  ideas  of 
the  Messianic  kingdom,  both  in  prophecy  and  in  the 
Gospel.  All  government  must  have  originated  with 
the  family,*  and  as  the  numbers  of  the  family  multi- 
plied, this  naturally  developed  into  the  clan  or  tribe 
with  its  chieftain,  and  then  into  the  nation  with  its 
monarch.  In  Israel  this  natural  development  was 
greatly  modified.  Abraham,  indeed,  can  hardly  be  re- 
fused the  title  of  the  Sheikh  of  a  tribe  when  he  could 
muster  for  war  three  hundred  and  eighteen  "  trained 
servants,  born  in  his  house,"  f  indicating  a  clan  of 
not  less  than  fifteen  hundred,  whose  multitude  of 
tents  spread  far  over  the  fields  where  he  sojourned. 
Abimelech,  king  of  the  Philistines,  made  a  treaty 
with  him  on  equal  terms,  :j:  and  the  Hittites  recog- 
nized him  as  "  a  mighty  prince  am.ong  us."§  His 
son  and  grandson  succeeded  probably  to  his  wealth 
and  position,  and  a  large  body  of  retainers  would  thus 

*  See  Maine's  Ancient  Law.  \  Gen.  xiv.  14. 

X  lb.  xxi.  22-32.  §  lb.  xxiii.  6. 


150  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

have  gone  down  with  the  flocks  and  herds  of  Jacob 
and  his  sons  to  the  land  of  Goshen.  But  there  the 
tribe,  or  rather  the  collection  of  tribes,  developed 
into  a  nation  under  extraordinary  circumstances. 
They  were  a  servile  people,  and  when  Moses  ap- 
peared as  their  deliverer  and  lawgiver,  it  was  under 
a  special  and  temporary  Divine  commission.  He 
made  no  attempt  to  become  the  founder  of  a  dy- 
nasty, and  his  sons  were  simply  ordinary  Levites 
among  their  brethren.  It  was  necessary  that  there 
should  be  a  general  to  lead  the  hosts  of  Israel  in  the 
conquest  of  the  land,  and  accordingly  Joshua,  chosen 
from  another  tribe,  was  selected  to  be  in  so  far 
the  successor  of  Moses.  But  this  also  was  a  merely 
temporary  appointment,  and  at  Joshua's  death  the 
tribes  of  Israel  were  left  with  no  visible  earthly  head, 
to  live  under  the  immediate  government  of  God. 
Everything  in  their  national  polity  was  made  to  sym- 
bolize the  fact  that  they  were  a  kingdom  under  an 
invisible  and  Divine  King.  The  bond  of  unity  among 
their  tribes,  that  which  alone  constituted  them  a  sin- 
gle nation,  was  their  common  and  united  worship  of 
Jehovah  and  obedience  to  His  laws.  In  so  far  as 
they  neglected  this,  they  fell  apart  into  a  mere  col- 
lection of  independent  and  sometimes  warring  tribes. 
In  all  grave  questions  of  national  concern  they  were 
to  ask  the  counsel  of  their  invisible  Governor  by  the 
Urim  and  Thummim  worn  by  the  high-priest.  The 
very  tenure  of  their  land  was  not  in  fee  simple,  but  as 
tenants  of  the  one  Lord,  to  whom  the  soil  belonged, 
and  to  whom  they  were  to  render  its  first  fruits  and 
tithes.     So  Israel  started  on  their  national  existence 


THE  KINGDOM  OF   GOD.  15 1 

as  a  kingdom  under  the  direct  and  immediate  gov- 
ernment of  an  invisible  and  Almighty  King. 

But  as  Israel  had  failed  of  its  high  vocation  to  be 
unto  God  ''  a  kingdom  of  priests,"  and  it  had  become 
necessary  to  consecrate  a  special  order  of  priests;  so 
also  they  failed  in  the  other  part  of  their  vocation 
to  be  "an  holy  nation.""^  For  some  centuries  tem- 
porary expedients  were  made  use  of  to  bridge  over 
the  difficulty.  During  the  whole  period  of  the 
Judges  no  other  permanent  form  of  government  was 
given  them  than  that  to  which  they  had  been  called, 
the  immediate  and  direct  government  of  Him  who 
had  chosen  them  to  be  His  people  ;  and  when  they 
fell  away  from  Him  and  were  punished  for  their 
sin,  and  then  turned  again  to  Him  in  penitence, 
special  deliverers  were  raised  up  from  time  to  time, 
always,  however,  as  the  human  agents  of  the  invis- 
ible King,  and  responsible  to  Him  for  the  exercise 
of  their  powers. 

At  last  the  people  tired  of  this  uncertain  and 
variable  condition  and  asked  an  earthly  king,  that 
they  might  be  "  like  all  the  nations."  f  It  was  a 
faithless  request,  and  God  declared  that  in  making 
it,  "  they  have  rejected  Me,  that  I  should  not  reign 
over  them."  t  Yet,  while  they  thus  put  aside  the 
higher  condition  designed  for  them,  the  lower  one 
which  they  sought  was  better  suited  to  their  neces- 
sities, as  long  as  they  persisted  in  their  sinfulness. 
God,  therefore,  granted  them  a  king,  not  as  an  ab- 
solute earthly  monarch,  but  as  holding  his  office 
only  on  the  condition  of  obedience  to  His  will,  and 

*  Ex.  xix.  6.  f  I  Sam.  viii.  6-20.  %  lb.  viii.  7. 


152  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

of  being  His  earthly  representative.  Israel  was  still 
to  be  a  theocracy ;  only  the  form  and  the  instru- 
ment of  the  Divine  government  was  to  be  changed. 
Their  real  King  was  still  the  invisible  Monarch  on 
high ;  the  earthly  king  was  chosen  and  anointed  by 
His  command,  and  always  held  responsible  to  Him. 
The  first  monarch,  Saul,  was  accordingly  set  aside 
for  disobedience,  and  another  chosen  who  should  be 
"  a  man  after  God's  heart."  During  the  following 
reign  the  idea  of  the  theocracy  was  made  prominent, 
and  David  constantly  sought  to  order  the  affairs  of 
the  kingdom  as  directed  from  on  high.  The  earthly 
glory  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel  reached  its  zenith 
under  Solomon,  and  was  then  arrested,  for  he,  intox- 
icated by  his  power,  prosperity  and  wealth,  more 
and  more  aimed  to  change  the  theocracy  to  a  world- 
ly empire.  As  soon  as  the  end  of  its  existence  was 
forgotten,  the  kingdom  itself  was  doomed,  and 
under  his  successor  was  broken  in  two.  Ten  of  the 
tribes  revolted  and  set  up  for  themselves  a  petty 
state,  given  over  to  idolatry,  and  this,  after  a  short 
checkered  existence,  became  a  prey  to  the  more 
powerful  heathen  kingdoms  around.  It  was  at  last 
destroyed  utterly,  and  its  people  carried  into  cap- 
tivity by  Assyria,  and  it  appears  no  more  upon  the 
page  of  history.  The  smaller  southern  kingdom  al- 
ways retained,  with  more  or  less  distinctness,  the 
idea  of  the  theocracy  ;  the  people  believed  that  they 
were  God's  people,  and  that  whoever  might  be  their 
earthly  king,  he  was  but  the  servant  of  the  Lord  of 
Hosts.  This  belief  was  never  wholly  lost,  though 
many  of  their  kings  were  exceedingly  wicked,  and 


THE  KINGDOM  OF   GOD.  1 53 

even  idolatrous ;  but  it  became  at  last,  to  a  great 
extent,  degraded  into  a  mere  national  superstition, 
overclouded  with  all  ungodliness  of  living,  and, 
therefore,  the  terrible  chastening  of  the  Babylonian 
captivity  became  necessary  for  the  purification  of 
the  people.  Then  they  were  taught  the  lesson  of 
the  "  stone  cut  without  hands,"  which  smote  the 
image  of  all  earthly  power  and  sovereignty  until  it 
was  "  broken  to  pieces  together,  and  became  like 
the  chaff  of  the  summer  threshing  floors."  "^ 

Thus,  under  whatever  form  of  government,  and 
however  unfaithful  to  their  calling,  Israel  was  never 
allowed  to  lose  the  knowledge  of  an  invisible  King, 
and  of  a  kingdom  which  under  His  almighty  sway 
must  finally  replace  all  earthly  power.  If  they  still 
thought  of  this  under  the  forms  of  worldly  glory  and 
with  the  characteristics  of  a  temporal  monarchy,  it 
was  because  their  earth-bound  minds  could  rise  no 
higher ;  but  the  main  fact  of  a  kingdom  which  is 
God's,  and  which  at  last  should  embrace  all  the  earth, 
was  firmly  planted  in  their  minds,  to  be  spiritualized 
and  glorified  by  the  teaching  of  the  Gospel. 

There  was  another  promise  made  to  Israel  which 
combined  with  this  expectation  of  a  future  universal 
kingdom  under  the  invisible  King,  and  did  much  to 
give  it,  in  the  minds  at  least  of  the  more  devout  and 
thoughtful,  a  peculiar  character.  The  nation  had 
been  originally  selected  as  the  special  depositary  of 
the  promise  that  the  Seed  of  the  woman  should 
**  bruise  the  serpent's  head,"f  and  Abraham  had  been 
called  that  in  his  seed  all  the  families  of  the  earth 
*  Dan.  ii.  34,  35.  f  Gen.  iii.  15. 


154         THE  OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

should  be  blessed.  As  the  promise  of  the  future 
kingdom  became  more  clear  and  definite  in  the 
mouths  of  the  prophets,  this  other  and  earlier  prom- 
ise was  ever  blended  with  it,  and  especially  was 
this  the  case  after  it  was  announced  that  the  future 
King  should  be  of  the  seed  of  David.  There  was  not 
only,  therefore,  an  expectation  of  a  future  universal 
kingdom,  but  that  this  kingdom  should  in  some  way 
heal  the  woes  of  earth  and  overcome  the  power  by 
which  man  had  been  brought  under  the  dominion  of 
evil.  Dazzled  as  the  eyes  of  the  carnally  minded 
Jews  were  by  their  visions  of  the  earthly  glory  of 
the  Messianic  kingdom,  those  who  thought  seriously 
upon  the  matter  could  not  but  perceive  that  a  king- 
dom, foretold  as  a  deliverance  of  mankind  from  the 
power  of  evil,  must  needs  contain  more  than  the  ele- 
ments of  earthly  greatness.  Only  a  kingdom  with 
spiritual  power  could  fulfil  that  which  was  promised. 
Still  further :  when  we  come  down  to  the  ages  of 
prophecy,  many  of  the  predictions  of  the  Messianic 
kingdom  are  of  a  distinctly  spiritual  character,  impos- 
sible of  fulfilment  by  any  merely  earthly  empire.  One 
cannot  read  Isaiah  without  observing  how  constantly 
from  beginning  to  end,  in  the  earlier  and  the  latter 
part  alike,  the  promise  of  the  future  is  the  promise 
of  the  forgiveness  of  sin  and  the  establishment  of 
righteousness.  ''  I  will  ....  purely  purge  away  thy 
dross,  and  take  away  all  thy  tin  ...  .  Zion  shall  be 
redeemed  with  judgment,  and  her  converts  with 
righteousness,"  *  is  the  key-note  of  the  whole  book. 
**  In  that  day  shall  the  Branch  of  the  Lord  be  beau- 

*  Isa.  i.  25-27. 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD.  155 

tiful  and  glorious,  ....  when  the  Lord  shall  have 
washed  away  the  filth  of  the  daughters  of  Zion,  and 
shall  have  purged  the  blood  of  Jerusalem  from  the 
midst  thereof  by  the  spirit  of  judgment,  and  by  the 
spirit  of  burning."  *  In  that  beautiful  prophecy  of 
the  "  Rod  out  of  the  stem  of  Jesse,"  it  is  declared 
that  "  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  shall  rest  upon  Him, 
....  the  Spirit  of  knowledge  and  of  the  fear  of  the 
Lord ;"  and  in  consequence  there  shall  be  universal 
happiness  and  peace,  "  for  the  earth  shall  be  full  of 
the  knowledge  of  the  Lord  as  the  waters  cover  the 
sea."  t  The  promise  of  "  the  precious  Corner  stone" 
to  be  laid  in  Zion  is  always  with  the  assurance, 
"  Judgment  also  will  I  lay  to  the  line,  and  righteous- 
ness to  the  plummet.  "J  The  future  *'  king  shall 
reign  in  righteousness;"  "  Judgment  shall  dwell  in 
the  wilderness,  and  righteousness  remain  in  the  fruit- 
ful field."  §  God  declares  to  Israel,  ''  I  am  He  that 
blotteth  out  thy  trangressions  for  mine  own  sake,  and 
will  not  remember  thy  sins."  1  And  again,  "  I  have 
blotted  out  as  a  thick  cloud  thy  transgressions,  and, 
as  a  cloud,  thy  sins."  *f  But  to  quote  all  the  passages 
to  the  same  effect  in  Isaiah  would  be  to  transcribe  a 
large  part  of  the  book.^*  The  latter  part  of  the  fifty- 
second  and  the  whole  of  the  fifty-third  chapter  are 
occupied  with  the  prophecy  of  the  removal  of  sin 
by  the  vicarious  sufferings  of  the  Lord's  servant,  ff 

*  Isa.  iv.  2,  4.  f  lb.  xi.  1-9.  %  lb.  xxviii.  i&,  17. 

§ /^.   xxxii.  I,  16.         \Ib.  xliii.  25.  \  lb.  xliv.  22. 

**  See  e.  g.  Isa.  xxvi.  2,  3,  12,  13;  xxvii.  9;  xxix.  19-24;  xxxiii.  5, 
14,  15,  24;  xlii.  1-4,  6;  xliii.  25;  xliv.  22;  xlv.  8;  xlvi.  12,  13; 
Ivii.  I5-I8r  Iviii.  6,  7;  Ix.  21;  Ixi.  8.  \\  lb.  lii.  13-liii.  12. 


15^  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

And  always  the  promise  that  "  the  Redeemer  shall 
come  to  Zion  "  is  qualified  expressly  or  implicitly 
by  the  explanation,  *' unto  them  that  turn  from 
transgression  in  Jacob."  * 

Isaiah's  contemporaries,  Hoseaf  and  Micah,  speak 
in  the  same  strain.  ''  He  will  have  compassion  upon 
us;  He  will  subdue  our  iniquities:  and  Thou  wilt 
cast  all  our  sins  into  the  depth  of  the  sea.  "  X 

Passing  on  to  the  later  period  of  Jeremiah,  the 
hope  held  out  to  the  people  of  God  was  still  the 
same.  The  promise  of  the  new  covenant  is  still, 
"  I  will  forgive  their  iniquity  and  remember  their  sin 
no  more ; "  §  "I  will  cleanse  them  from  all  their 
iniquity,  whereby  they  have  sinned  against  me."  || 
Ezekiel  declares,  "  I  will  put  a  new  spirit  within  you, 
and  I  will  take  away  the  stony  heart  out  of  their 
flesh  ....  that  they  may  walk  in  my  statutes  and 
keep  mine  ordinances."  Tf  And  again, ''  I  will  sprinkle 

clean  water  upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be  clean 

A  new  heart  also  will  I  give  you  ....  and  I  will  put 
my  Spirit  within  you,  and  cause  you  to  walk  in  my 
statutes."  ^^  His  prophecy  of  the  purifying  waters 
from  the  sanctuary  is  familiar,  ff  Daniel  foretells  the 
"  seventy  weeks  determined  upon  thy  people  .... 
to  finish  the  transgression,  and  to  make  an  end  of 
sins,  and  to  make  reconciliation  for  iniquity,  and  to 
bring  in  everlasting  righteousness." ifj  The  prophets 
of  the  return  from  the  captivity,  to  the  last  dwell 
upon  the  same  hope.     Zechariah  says,  "  In  that  day 

*  Is.  lix.  20.  f  Hos.  xiv.  4.  X  Mic.  vii.  19. 

§  Jer.  xxxi.  34.  ||  lb.  xxxiii.  8.  1"  Ezek.  xi.  19. 

**Ezek.  xxxvi.  25-27.       \\  lb,  xlvii.  I-12.       :|:J  Dan!  ix.  24. 


THE  KINGDOM  OF   GOD.  15/ 

there  shall  be  a  fountain  opened  to  the  house  of 
David  and  to  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  for  sin 
and  for  uncleanness.^  And  Malachi  declares  that 
*^  the  Messenger  of  the  covenant "  shall  be  "  like  a 
refiner's  fire  and  like  fuller's  soap  ;  "  f  and  so  crying 
is  the  need  of  this  purification,  that  before  the  "  Sun 
of  Righteousness  arise  with  healing  in  His  wings," 
and  '*  the  coming  of  the  great  and  dreadful  day  of 
the  Lord,"  Elijah  the  prophet  must  be  sent  to 
•'  turn  the  heart  of  the  fathers  to  the  children  .... 
lest  I  come  and  smite  the  earth  with  a  curse."  :|: 

These  teachings  of  the  prophets  are  extremely 
frequent,  and  are  associated  and  interwoven  with  all 
their  promise  of  the  Messianic  kingdom.  It  was  to 
be  a  universal  empire  under  an  invisible  and  almighty 
monarch,  the  abode  of  righteousness,  and  therefore 
all  sin  must  be  purged  away  from  its  citizens.  Its 
Head  should  be  manifested  on  earth  as  the  Re- 
deemer who  should  bruise  the  serpent's  head,  the 
Seed  of  Abraham  in  whom  all  the  families  of  the 
earth  should  be  blessed,  the  King  of  the  house  of 
David  unto  whom  the  people  should  be  holy  to  the 
Lord  in  heart  and  life. 

The  people,  therefore,  showed  no  surprise  at  the 
preaching  of  John  the  Baptist,  "  Repent  ye,  for  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand."  §  However  the  idea 
of  the  kingdom  may  have  been  overlaid  in  the  pop- 
ular mind  by  gross  and  sensual  expectations,  under- 
neath there  ever  lay  the  prophetic  representations 
calling  for  true  and  earnest  repentance  as  the  king- 
dom was  announced  to  be  near.     When  our  Lord 


*Zech.  xiii.  9.      f  Mai.  Hi.  i,  2.      Xlb.  iv.  2-6.     §Matt.  iii.  2. 


158  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS, 

Himself  took  up  the  same  words  the  people  were 
prepared  for  them,  and  "the  kingdom  of  heaven" 
or  ''  of  God  "  was  no  new  idea.  It  is  noticeable  that 
our  Lord,  during  His  life  on  earth,  never  says  that  it 
has  come,  but  always  that  it  is  near,  has  touched  "^ 
you.  More  He  could  not  say  until  the  cross  had 
been  reared  on  Calvary,  the  bars  of  the  tomb  burst, 
and  He  had  returned  to  the  glory  He  had  with  the 
Father  before  the  world  was.  Yet  His  coming 
brought  the  kingdom,  and  when  His  work  was  com- 
pleted it  was  established  forever,  though  but  as  the 
mustard  seed,  to  grow  and  spread  through  the  ages, 
or  as  the  leaven  to  diffuse  its  influence  little  by 
little  until  the  whole  lump  should  be  leavened. 
Most  of  His  parables  were  spoken  to  illustrate  the 
nature  and  character  of  that  kingdom.  Not  a  line 
of  its  features  is  at  variance  with  the  prophetic 
descriptions,  but  there  is  much  to  make  these  more 
distinct  and  to  clear  away  popular  misapprehen- 
sions. Still,  while  He  lived  on  earth,  these  could 
not  be  entirely  removed,  and  to  the  last  moment 
even  His  chosen  disciples  showed  the  confusion  yet 
remaining  in  their  minds  by  the  question,  "•  Lord, 
wilt  Thou  at  this  time  restore  again  the  kingdom  to 
Israel."  f  Our  Lord  had  indeed  taught  them,  in 
answer  to  a  question  of  the  Pharisees,  "The  king- 
dom of  God  Cometh  not  with  observation  :  neither 
shall  they  say,  Lo  here !  or  lo  there !  for  behold  the 
kingdom  of  God  is  within  you  ;" :[  but  they  were  not 

*  eqfOadev.  •}•  Acts,  i.  6. 

I  Luke,  xvii.  20,  21.  Within,  and  not  ajnong,  is  the  right  transla- 
tion, both  because  of  the  proper  meaning  of  fcVrd?,  and  because  our 
Lord  never  speaks  of  His  kingdom  as  already  established. 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD.  1 59 

prepared  to  understand  its  spiritual  character.  It 
was  not  until  after  they  had  been  enlightened  by  the 
gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost  that  they  could  teach  "we 
must  through  much  tribulation  enter  into  the  king- 
dom of  God,"  *  that  they  realized  that  this  kingdom 
"  is  not  meat  and  drink ;  but  righteousness,  and 
peace,  and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost  ;"f  "that  flesh 
and  blood  cannot  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God ; "  :j: 
that  only  by  the  cultivation  of  a  proper  character 
and  life  "  an  entrance  shall  be  ministered  unto  you 
abundantly  into  the  everlasting  kingdom  of  our 
Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ; "§  and  only  then 
could  they  thankfully  and  exultingly  feel  that  the 
promise  was  already  fulfilled,  and  that  God  "HATH 
translated  us  into  the  kingdom  of  His  dear  Son,"  || 
and  exhort  their  fellow  disciples,  "  wherefore  we  re- 
ceiving a  kingdom  which  cannot  be  moved,  let  us  have 
grace  whereby  we  may  serve  God  acceptably."  T  So 
far  the  description  of  the  kingdom  was  common  to 
both  Dispensations ;  but  this  was  necessarily  set 
forth  under  the  earlier  in  figures  and  images  which 
the  carnally  minded  perverted  into  the  expectation 
of  a  vast  temporal  dominion,  in  which  the  chosen 
people  should  bear  earthly  sway  over  all  the  nations 
of  the  world.  Not  until  the  revelation  of  the  Gos- 
pel could  it  be  made  entirely  clear  that  the  promised 
kingdom  of  the  Redeemer  was  "  not  of  this  world,"  ^"^ 
but  should  be  established  in  the  hearts  of  His  dis- 
ciples. Yet  the  prophets  had  all  along  taught  the 
same  truth   as   clearly  as  was  practicable   in  their 

*Acts,  xiv.  22.    f  Rom.  xiv.  17.    %  i  Cor.  xv.  50.     §  2  Pet.  i.  11. 
8  Col.  i.  13.  ^  Heb.  xii.  28.  ■^*John,  xviii.  36. 


l6o  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

times.  Certain  differences  in  the  representation 
were  to  be  expected.  Even  in  the  New  Testament 
the  kingdom  of  God  is  set  forth  in  somewhat  dif- 
ferent aspects  by  the  various  writers.  St.  Matthew 
dehghts  to  dwell  upon  it  as  the  fulfilment  and  con- 
summation of  the  Old  Dispensation,  given  to  the 
chosen  people;  St.  Luke,  as  a  universal  kingdom, 
designed  from  the  first  for  all  mankind.  Both  as- 
pects are  true,  and  neither  of  them  excludes  the 
other. 

The  relation  between  the  two  Covenants  in  their 
presentation  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  was  the  same 
as  has  been  observed  in  regard  to  everything  else ; 
there  was  one  essential  idea  underlying  both,  and 
this  idea  was  taught  of  old  in  such  wise  as  to  pre- 
pare for  its  fuller  development  and  realization  under 
the  Gospel.  The  long  promised  victory  over  the 
power  of  evil  should  then  be  accomplished,  and 
perfect  peace  and  communion  between  God  and 
man  be  restored. 

In  this,  as  in  other  matters,  the  prophets  occupied 
a  very  peculiar  and  important  position  under  the 
Old  Dispensation.  Their  predictions  of  the  future 
formed  but  a  small  part  of  their  function.  They 
were  not  recognized  by  the  law  as  an  established 
order,  nor  were  their  duties  in  any  way  prescribed. 
Nevertheless,  they  are  found  in  every  period  of 
Israel's  history,  and  under  Samuel  schools  of  them 
were  established,  which  appear  to  have  continued 
for  centuries,  since  they  are  mentioned  in  the  times 
of  Elijah*  and  Elisha.f    They  were  often  especially 

*2  Kings,  ii.  3,  5,  15.  f  lb   iv.  i,  38;  vi.  i;  ix.  i,  etc 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD.  l6l 

divinely  called  to  their  office,  sometimes  from  these 
schools,  sometimes  from  the  priesthood,  as  in  the 
case  of  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel,  and  sometimes  from 
the  common  people.*  Their  duty  was  to  declare, 
both  to  the  kings  and  to  the  people,  the  will  of  God. 
This  was  communicated  to  them  by  special  revela- 
tion when  there  was  occasion  ;  but  sometimes,  as  in 
the  case  of  Samuel's  answer  to  the  people  asking 
for  a  king,  f  or  of  Nathan's  approval  of  David's  pur- 
pose to  build  the  temple,  %  they  spoke  from  their 
own  sense  of  right,  and  were  divinely  required  to 
reverse  their  first  opinion.  In  general,  they  were 
the  spiritual  counsellors  of  the  nation,  and  the  ex- 
pounders of  the  revelations  already  made.  They 
thus  in  so  far  foreshadowed  and  were  the  precursors 
of  the  Christian  ministry,  and  *'  Prophets  "  became 
a  common  name  of  the  religious  teachers  of  the  New 
Covenant ;  still  they  had  no  special  spiritual  care  of 
particular  portions  of  the  people,  and  the  *^  cure  of 
souls"  involved  in  parochial  organizations  is  a  special 
feature  of  Christianity.  Yet,  in  the  constant  proc- 
lamation of  the  Messianic  kingdom  as  a  kingdom 
of  righteousness,  and  of  the  necessity  of  repentance 
as  a  preparation  for  its  coming,  may  be  seen  some- 
thing of  the  importance  of  their  office  in  the  rela- 
tion of  the  Old  Dispensation  to  the  New. 

It  is  to  be  remembered  that  the  kingdom  of  God, 
whether  under  the  Old  or  the  New  Dispensation,  is 
always  represented  in  the  Scriptures  as  based  upon 
a  Covenant  between  God  and  man.     It  is  never  re- 

*  Amos,  vii.  14,  15.  f  i  Sam.  viii.  6,  7. 

X  2  Sam.  vii.  3,  8-12;  i  Chron.  xvii.  2,  4. 
II 


1 62  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

garded  as  a  rule  imposed  by  almighty  power  upon 
unconscious  or  unwilling  subjects.  The  service 
which  is  acceptable  to  God  must  ever  be  a  free-will 
service,  and  because  it  is  a  service  of  the  heart  and 
of  the  will,  St.  James  describes  it  as  ''  the  perfect 
law  of  liberty,"  "^  and  the  Collect  addresses  God  as 
one  "  Whose  service  is  perfect  freedom."  f  The 
very  name  by  which  the  records  of  both  Dispen- 
sations are  known,  and  by  which  the  Old  is  re- 
peatedly called  in  the  New,  is  '*  Covenant."  We 
have  long  been  accustomed  to  use  the  word  "■  Testa- 
ment," but  "  covenant  "  is  the  proper  force  of  the 
original  word,  :j:  and  conveys  the  idea  sanctioned  by 
God  Himself.  It  was  a  "  Covenant "  which  He 
made  with  Noah,  §  with  Abraham,  ||  Isaac,  Tf  and 
Jacob,  ^"  and  with  their  descendants  at  the  giving 
of  the  law.  ff 

It  is  true  that  St.  Peter  at  the  council  of  Jeru- 
salem speaks  of  this  law  as  ''  a  yoke  upon  the  neck 
of  the  disciples  which  neither  our  fathers  nor  we 
were  able  to  bear;"  Jj:  and  St.  Paul  describes  it  as 
"the  weak  and  beggarly  elements,"  §§  and  again  as 

*  James,  i.  25. 

t  Collect  for  Peace  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 

X  Heb.  n^-}3,  Gr,  8ia^7]H7]. 

§  Gen.  vi.  18;  ix.  9,  12,  13,  15,  16. 

I  Gen.  XV.  18;  xvii.  2,9;Luke,  i.  72;  Acts,  iii.  25;  Gal.  iii.  17. 

T[  Gen.  xvii.  19;  xxvi,  3. 

**  Ex.  ii.  24;  vi.  4;  I  Chron.  xvi.  17. 

ff  Ex.  vi.  4;  xix.  5;  xxiv.  7,  8;  xxxiv.  27;  Lev.  xxvi.  9,  25,  42,  44, 
45;  Deut.  V.  2;  ix.  9;  xxix.  i,  12,  14;  Judg.  ii.  i;  Jer.  xi,  i  ;  xxxi, 
31-33- 

XX  Acts,  XV.  10.  §§  Gal.  iv.  9. 


THE   KINGDOM  OF  GOD.  1 63 

the  covenant  "  from  the  Mount  Sinai,  which  gender- 
eth  to  bondage,"  "  and  still  again,  as  "the  enmity, 
even  the  law  of  commandments  contained  in  ordi- 
nances." t  Such  must  ever  be  the  relation  of  the 
*' schoolmaster  "  undertaking  to  continue  his  disci- 
pline over  the  full  grown  man  who  has  passed  beyond 
his  pupilage.  That  which  was  good  for  the  child 
becomes  intolerable  and  prejudicial  to  the  man. 
Nevertheless,  there  had  been  a  time  of  childhood 
in  the  history  of  God's  people,  and  that  which  was 
good  for  them  then  must  afterwards  be  put  away  ; 
and  so  the  same  St.  Paul  speaks  of  the  ''  command- 
ment which  was  ordained  to  life,"  although,  through 
sin,  it  was  ''  found  to  be  unto  death,"  and  declares 
that  "  the  law  is  holy,  and  the  commandment  holy, 
and  just  and  good,"  and  adds,  *'  we  know  that  the 
law  is  spiritual."  % 

The  relation  therefore  of  the  law  to  the  Gospel 
was  not  one  of  contradiction,  but  of  preparation. 
Opposition  arose  between  them  only  when  this  rela- 
tion was  neglected  and  an  attempt  made  to  con- 
tinue preparatory  precepts  and  customs  after  their 
purpose  and  consummation  had  been  revealed.  The 
scaffolding,  however  necessary  while  the  building 
was  in  progress,  became  unsightly  and  inconvenient 
when  the  edifice  stood  complete,  and  those  who 
would  still  maintain  it,  mar  the  plans  of  the  Divine 
Architect. 

But  the  fact  must  be  emphasized  that  the  law, 
while  it  remained,  was  a  covenant.  Certainly  the 
command  was  from  God,  and  the  people  were  bound 

*  Gal.  iv.  24.  f  Eph.  ii.  15.  %  Rom.  vii.  10,  12,  14. 


164  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

to  obey  it,  but  this  would  be  true  of  all  mankind. 
St.  Paul  shows  at  length  in  his  Epistle  to  the 
Romans*  that  there  is  a  certain  knowledge  of  the 
Divine  Being  and  of  His  will  among  all  men,  and 
that  they  are  guilty  before  Him  in  refusing  their  obe- 
dience to  this.  But  the  obligation  of  the  chosen 
people  was  something  more  than  that  of  the  heathen. 
They  had  received  a  fuller  revelation,  a  clearer  knowl- 
edge of  duty,  and  had  entered  into  solemn  covenant 
of  obedience.  This  covenant,  originally  made  by 
the  fathers,  was  expressly  renewed  to  each  child  of 
Israel  in  the  sacrament  of  circumcision,  and,  in  his 
maturer  years,  in  the  Passover  and  other  institutions 
of  the  Mosaic  economy.  The  difference  in  this  re- 
spect between  Judaism  and  Christianity  was  that  the 
former  was  the  exclusive  privilege  of  a  chosen  nation, 
the  latter  is  the  universal  blessing  of  mankind.  But 
both  were  covenants.  The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  in 
the  hearts  of  men  ;  and  they  who  truly  serve  God, 
serve  Him  with  a  "  reasonable  service,"  f  with  a  ser- 
vice of  the  heart  and  the  affections  which  must  ever 
be  perfect  freedom. 

It  remains  to  say  a  word  upon  the  worship  of  the 
older  church  in  its  relation  to  Christian  worship  ;  for 
worship,  whether  on  earth  or  in  heaven,  must  ever  be 
one  of  the  characteristics  of  the  kingdom  of  God. 
In  this  a  marked  and  blessed  progress  may  be  ob- 
served corresponding  to  the  progress  of  revelation 
in  all  other  respects. 

Private  worship  in  praise  and  prayer  and  confes- 
sion has  necessarily  been  essentially  the  same  in  all 
*  Rom.  i,  18-32.  t  ^b-  xii.  i. 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD.  1^5 

ages,  except  as  modified  by  the  indwelling  of  that 
"  Spirit  of  adoption,  whereby  we  cry  Abba,  Father,""^ 
and  by  the  clearer  knowledge  of  the  Father's  will, 
and  of  the  redemption  that  is  in  His  Son.  Of  this 
private  worship,  there  is  no  occasion  to  speak.  But 
the  public  and  collective  worship  of  men  has  greatly 
changed.  There  is  no  record  of  any  other  social  or 
public  worship  in  the  earliest  times  than  in  connec- 
tion with  the  offering  of  sacrifices.  When  the  places 
where  these  might  be  offered  came  to  be  limited  to 
those  which  God  should  '^  choose  to  place  His  name 
there,"  or  to  a  single  place,  as  while  the  tabernacle 
was  standing  and  again  after  the  temple  was  built, 
such  sacrificial  worship  must  have  been  impossible  to 
the  great  mass  of  the  people  except  on  rare  occasions. 
When  Israel  became  more  strongly  knit  together 
as  a  nation  and  settled  down  to  peaceful  pursuits, 
the  need  of  some  more  frequent  common  worship 
was  likely  to  be  felt.  The  Sabbath  had  been  from 
the  first  enjoined  as  a  day  of  rest  from  labor,  and 
some  of  its  hours  were  probably  improved  in  the 
family  and  then  in  the  neighborhood  in  recounting 
to  the  children  the  wonderful  works  wrought  for  the 
fathers.  To  this,  after  sacred  poetry  had  been  mul- 
tiplied, would  naturally  be  joined  the  chanting,  in 
concert  or  responsively,  the  national  hymns  of  prayer 
and  praise.  Such  worship  would  have  been  usually 
in  the  open  air  and  altogether  informal  and  occa- 
sional. 

It  w^s  not  until  after  the  return  from  the  captivity 
that  synagogues  began  to  be  erected,  administered 

*  Rom.  viii.  15. 


1 66  THE   OLD  AND   NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

with  order  and  regularity,  and  a  stated,  non-sacri- 
ficial, worship  instituted,  with  prayer,  the  reading  of 
the  sacred  word,  singing,  and  occasional  exhorta- 
tion. These  synagogues  were  still  in  process  of  mul- 
tiplication at  the  time  of  the  Christian  era.*  In 
them  much  of  our  Lord's  teaching  was  given,  f  and 
some  of  His  mighty  works  were  wrought.  X  They 
afforded  an  opportunity  for  the  first  promulgation  of 
the  Gospel  by  the  Apostles,  not  only  in  Judea,  but 
in  all  the  cities  of  the  Roman  Empire  where  the  Jews 
had  congregated.  Here  also  Gentiles  were  reached 
who  had  come  in  to  attend  the  Jewish  worship.  § 

The  worship  of  the  synagogue  was  naturally  the 
prototype  of  that  of  the  Christian  Church.  This  was 
especially  true  of  the  Jews,  of  whom  the  Church 
was  at  first  exclusively  composed,  and  scarcely  less  so 
of  the  earlier  converts  from  the  Gentiles,  who  were 
chiefly  gathered  from  those  who  attended  the  Jewish 
worship.  Christian  worship  rested,  not  upon  daily 
typical  and  imperfect  sacrifices,  but  upon  the  one 
perfect  Sacrifice  accomplished  once  for  all ;  and  it 
was  designed,  not  for  a  peculiar  nation  having  an 
earthly  centre,  but  for  all  mankind  who  should  "  wor- 
ship God  in  spirit  and  in  truth."  It  was  therefore 
free  from  all  local  limitations,  and  hence  it  was  as- 
similated to  the  synagogue  rather  than  to  the  tem- 
ple worship. 

The  worship    of   '*  the  kingdom    of   God "  under 

*  Luke,  vii,  5. 

f  Matt.  iv.  23  ;  ix.  35  ;  xiii.  54  ;  Mark,  i.  21,  39  ;  Luke,  iv.  15  ; 
John,  vi.  59,  etc. 

X  Matt.  xii.  9-13  ;  Luke,  iv.  33-35,  etc.         §  Acts,  xiii.  42-43. 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD.  1 6/ 

both  the  Old  and  the  New  Dispensations  has  at 
once  a  retrospective  and  a  prospective  character ; 
but  in  the  Old,  the  retrospective  element  had  respect 
to  the  preparatory  stages  of  the  history  and  teach- 
ing of  the  people  of  God,  and  the  prospective  to  the 
coming  of  the  promised  Redeemer.  In  the  New,  the 
retrospective  element  is  that  which  was  prospect- 
ive of  old,  and  the  prospective  looks  forward  only 
to  the  perfect  consummation  of  what  has  already 
begun.  This  change  of  that  which  was  hoped  for 
into  that  which  has  already  been  realized,  involves 
a  much  larger  development  of  present  privilege  and 
blessing.  Already  "  God  hath  given  to  us  eternal 
life,  and  this  life  is  in  His  Son.  He  that  hath  the 
Son  hath  life.'"*  We  are  already  made  members  of 
the  kingdom  ;  we  have  already  "  passed  from  death 
unto  life ; "  we  already  have  "  the  earnest  of  the 
Spirit  in  our  hearts ;"  t  and  that  which  is  still  future 
is  not  a  wholly  new  life,  but  the  development  and 
perfecting  of  that  which  is  already  begun.  Even 
now  we  are  taught  by  the  Spirit  of  adoption  to  call 
Him  who  rules  on  high,  "  Abba,  Father."  :j: 

From  the  progress  thus  made  results  another 
change.  The  consciousness  of  the  brotherhood  of 
all  who  have  received  this  Spirit  in  their  hearts  cre- 
ates a  new  necessity  for  common  prayer,  and  gives 
new  zest  and  meaning  to  common  worship.  They 
who  partake  together  of  the  same  redemption,  they 
who  share  the  same  life  of  the  Spirit,  they  who 
have  the  same  common  hope,  and  are  to  worship 

*  I  John,  iv.  II,  12.  t  2  Cor.  i.  22,  cf.  v.  5;  Eph.  i.  14. 

\  Rom.  viii.  15;  Gal.  iv.  6. 


1 68  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

hereafter  before  the  same  throne,  have  need  also 
here  in  their  earthly  pilgrimage  of  a  common  wor- 
ship. 

The  difference  between  the  dispensations  in  this 
respect  may  be  a  difference  of  degree  rather  than  of 
kind ;  still  it  is  a  very  marked  and  real  difference. 
As  there  was  "  life  and  immortality  "  of  old,  but  it 
was  Christ  who,  by  abolishing  death,  "  brought  these 
to  light ;"  *  so  there  was  a  common  membership  in 
the  Church  of  their  fathers,  but  it  is  only  under  the 
Gospel  that  we  are  made  to  realize  that  "  we,  being 
many,  are  one  body  in  Christ,  and  every  one  mem- 
bers one  of  another."  f  Of  old,  there  was  a  strong 
community  of  feeling  between  all  who  were  de- 
scended from  Abraham;  but  it  rested  upon  this  natu- 
ral descent,  and  was  hardly  extended  even  to  "  the 
proselyte  of  the  gate,"  though  he  worshipped  with 
the  chosen  people.  Now,  our  common  prayers,  con- 
fession and  praise,  our  common  baptism  and  partici- 
pation in  the  one  bread,  continually  emphasize  the 
fact  that  we  are  all  one  body  in  Christ,  who  is  our 
brother.  "  For  we,  being  many,  are  one  bread  and 
one  body:  for  we  are  all  partakers  of  that  one 
bread.":]:  It  is  in  view  of  the  narrow  nationality  of 
the  Old  Dispensation  that  St.  Paul  teaches  the  unity 
and  common  brotherhood  of  all  the  members  of  the 
New  :  "  Ye  are  ....  fellow  citizens  with  the  saints 
and  of  the  household  of  God,  and  are  built  upon  the 
foundation  of  the  apostles  and  prophets,  Jesus  Christ 
Himself  being  the  chief  corner-stone :  in  Whom  all 
the  building  fitly  framed  together  groweth  into  an 

*  2  Tim.  i.  lo.  f  Rom.  xii.  5.  ij:  i  Cor.  x.  17. 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD.  1 69 

holy  temple  in  the  Lord ;  in  Whom  ye  also  are 
builded  together  for  an  habitation  of  God  through 
the  Spirit."  * 

The  worship,  therefore,  of  the  Church,  the  king- 
dom of  God,  brings  out  the  same  relation  of  prog- 
ress from  the  Old  to  the  New  which  has  been  seen 
everywhere.  The  extension  and  advance  is  so  great 
that  we  are  tempted  to  forget  that  its  beginnings 
are  to  be  found  in  the  soil  of  the  Old  Dispensation. 
Christian  worship  brings  out  in  strong  relief  the  idea 
of  Christian  brotherhood.  But,  above  all,  we  are 
brought  nearer  to  God,  and  come  to  Him,  not  as  the 
Almighty  Ruler,  the  distant  Sovereign  of  the  skies, 
but  in  and  through  Christ  we  are  taught  to  call  Him 
"  Our  Father  which  art  in  heaven." 

*  Eph.  ii.  19-22. 


LECTURE  VIII. 

PROPHECY. 

Prophecy  etymologically,  and  in  the  scriptural 
use  of  the  word,  means  any  utterance  on  God's  be- 
half ;  but  it  will  be  treated  here  oiily  in  that  more 
restricted  sense  which  is  confined  to  the  prediction 
of  the  future. 

True  prophecy  necessarily  involves  the  supernat- 
ural and  miraculous,  and  its  existence  is  therefore 
denied  by  all  who  regard  our  religion  as  a  mere 
human  development.  With  such  there  need  here  be 
no  argument  ;  our  differences  with  them  must  be  dis- 
cussed on  a  larger  field.  But  many  who  profess  to 
admit  these  things  yet  deny  the  existence  of  really 
predictive  prophecies,  and  the  controversy  on  this 
point,  always  more  or  less  active,  has  been  intensi- 
fied through  the  discussions  of  the  most  modern  so- 
called  critical  school.  The  first  point  must  therefore 
be  to  establish  the  fact  of  prophecy.  Its  opponents 
have  generally  narrowed  down  the  question  to  this 
statement  :  the  existence  of  prophecy  will  be  estab- 
lished by  any  instance  in  which  any  definite  event, 
incapable  of  being  foreseen  by  human  sagacity,  has 
been  foretold  at  a  time  certainly  before  the  event  ; 
but  without  such  instance  it  cannot  be  admitted,  for 
want  of  any  sufficient  proof  of  its  existence.     There 


PROPHECY.  171 

is  other  and  further  proof  of  prophecy  ;  but  for  the 
present  this  demand  of  its  opponents  may  be  ac- 
cepted. It  is  not  to  be  denied  that  there  are  diffi- 
culties in  this,  because  the  critics  generally  assume 
that  the  very  existence  of  such  a  prophecy  as  they 
require  is  in  itself  proof  of  the  lateness  of  the  book  in 
which  it  is  contained,  or  at  least  of  its  interpolation. 
Yet,  while  they  thus  reject  in  advance  all  ordinary 
sources  of  proof,  there  remains  an  abundance  which 
cannot  be  gainsaid.  I  select  only  three  instances — 
which  is  three  times  as  much  as  is  demanded. 

The  first  is  the  prophecy  of  Micah :  ''  But  thou, 
Bethlehem  Ephratah,  though  thou  be  little  among 
the  thousands  of  Judah,  yet  out  of  thee  shall  He 
come  forth  unto  Me  that  is  to  be  Ruler  in  Israel, 
Whose  goings  forth  have  been  from  of  old,  from 
everlasting."*  There  is  here  no  question  of  the 
date  of  the  prophet  as  in  the  eighth  century  before 
the  Christian  era,  and  there  is  no  suggestion  of  in- 
terpolation, since  in  view  of  the  statement  of  the 
royal  commission  appointed  by  Herod,  this,  if  pos- 
sible, must  have  been  too  early  to  affect  the  argu- 
ment. The  interpretation  was  settled  in  the  most 
public  and  formal  manner  before  the  fulfilment  was 
known.  In  answer  to  the  question  of  the  Magi, 
"  Where  is  he  that  is  born  king  of  the  Jews?  "  the 
king  appointed  a  commission  of  inquiry,  composed 
of  **  all  the  chief  priests  and  scribes  of  the  people," 
and  they  replied,  on  the  express  ground  of  this 
prophecy,  "  in  Bethlehem."  f  If  the  Gospel  of  St. 
Matthew  be  accepted  as  historically  reliable,  there 

*  Micah,  V.  2.  f  Matt.  ii.  1-6, 


1/2  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

remains  but  one  possible  way  of  escaping  the  force 
of  this  prophecy.  It  may  be  said  that  as  the  Messiah 
was  expected  to  be  David's  son  (an  expectation  it- 
self resting  on  previous  prophecy),  the  prophet  might 
have  simply  thought  it  probable  that  He  would  be 
born  in  David's  town.  This  is  not  likely.  David 
early  left  Bethlehem  and  made  Jerusalem  his  royal 
city.  So  far  as  human  sagacity  could  have  foreseen, 
his  great  descendant  would  certainly  be  born  there. 
But  independently  of  this  fact,  there  is  another  in- 
dependent and  seemingly  contradictory  prophecy 
which  must  be  considered  in  connection  with  this. 
In  Isaiah  (ix.  I,  2)  it  is  declared  that  the  despised 
land  of  Zebulon  and  Naphtali  shall  be  greatly  hon- 
ored and  shall  see  a  great  light.  This  was  fulfilled, 
and  fulfilled  only,  by  the  long  residence  and  mighty 
v/orks  there  of  our  Lord.  Here,  then,  are  two 
prophecies,  one  of  the  birth  of  the  Messiah  at  Beth- 
lehem, the  other  of  His  residence  in  the  outcast 
region  of  Galilee.  It  is  inconceivable  that  human 
sagacity  could  have  foreseen  both  of  these  things. 
The  other  two  instances  I  have  selected  because 
their  fulfilment  is  not  distinctly  recorded  in  Script- 
ure, and  therefore  there  can  be  no  possible  ques- 
tion of  an  attempt  to  bring  prophecy  and  fulfilment 
into  accord.  The  first  of  them  occurs  in  Jacob's 
dying  benediction  upon  the  twelve  tribes.*  The 
date  of  this  has  indeed  been  disputed,  and  some 
critics  have  assigned  it  to  the  time  of  David  ;  but 
this  has  been  done  on  purely  internal  grounds  of 
such  slight  value  as  not  to  seem  entitled  to  consid- 

*  Gen.  xlix.  7. 


PROPHECY.  173 

eration.  We  assume  that  any  fair  examination  of 
its  contents  shows  that  it  must  have  been  written 
before  the  settlement  of  tlie  tribes  in  Canaan,  which 
is  all  that  is  necessary  for  our  purpose.  Here,  then, 
it  is  said  of  Simeon  and  Levi,  ^^  I  will  divide  them 
in  Jacob,  and  scatter  them  in  Israel."  There  is  no 
difficulty  in  regard  to  Levi.  The  prophecy,  how- 
ever, was  fulfilled  in  a  very  different  sense  from 
that  which  the  speaker  expected.  He  describes 
this  scattering  as  a  punishment  on  these  tribes  for 
the  sins  of  their  fathers,  and  it  is  quite  impossible 
that  it  could  have  been  put  in  this  way  by  a  writer 
living  after  the  selection  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  to  the 
honor  of  ministrants  of  the  sanctuary.  Neverthe- 
less, in  his  case  the  prophecy  was  literally  carried 
out ;  Levi  had  no  inheritance  among  the  other 
tribes,  but  occupied  cities  scattered  among  them  all. 
Only,  in  consequence  of  the  noble  stand  taken  by 
the  members  of  this  tribe  in  a  critical  rebellion  in 
the  wilderness,  the  curse  was  transformed  into  a 
blessing.  About  Simeon  nothing  is  anywhere  said 
of  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy ;  but  we  have  the 
following  facts  which  show  that  it  must  have  been 
fulfilled  in  accordance  with  its  original  intent.  In 
the  division  of  the  land  among  the  tribes  the  por- 
tion assigned  to  Simeon  was  at  the  extreme  south, 
the  southern  part  of  the  district  originally  given  to 
Judah."  This  territory  was  at  the  time  sufficiently 
fertile,  as  is  evidenced  by  the  remains  still  existing 
there  ;  f  but  is  now  a  desolate  wilderness,  habitable 

*  Josh,  xix,  1-9, 

f  See  Palmer's  Desei-t  of  the  Exodus;  Trumbull's  Kadesh-Barnea 


174  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

only  by  nomads.  The  change  has  been  brought 
about  by  the  destruction  of  the  works  for  irrigation 
and  the  gradual  drying  up  of  the  country  ;  and  this 
appears  to  have  set  in  at  an  early  date,  since  in  the 
time  of  Saul  and  of  David  the  region  was  inhabited 
by  Amalekites  and  a  few  of  the  Kenites.  Simeon  is 
not  at  all  mentioned  in  the  account  of  the  various 
campaigns  in  that  region,  and  in  part  had  already  left 
it.*  It  is  certain  that  a  little  later,  when  the  kingdom 
was  divided,  Simeon,  as  a  tribe,  joined  his  fortunes 
with  the  "■  ten  tribes,"  the  northern  kingdom,  which 
would  have  been  impossible  if  his  territory  had  been 
separated  from  them  by  the  whole  breadth  of  Judah 
and  Benjamin.  He  had  then  left  his  original  inher- 
itance and  gone  north.  But  where  could  he  have 
gone  ?  The  whole  land  was  already  in  the  posses- 
sion and  occupation  of  the  other  tribes.  He  could 
only  have  been  divided  and  scattered  among  them. 
Human  sagacity  could  not  have  foreseen  this,  nor 
how  precisely  the  same  prophecy  in  regard  to  Simeon 
and  to  Levi  should  have  been  carried  out  in  such 
totally  different  ways  and  with  such  opposite  results. 
The  remaining  prophecy  to  which  I  referred  be- 
longs to  the  New  Testament,  and  was  uttered  by 
our  Lord  Himself.  Formerly  the  doubt  was  urged 
whether  it  might  not  have  been  written  after  the 
event ;  but  the  result  of  searching  criticism  has  been 
to  establish  a  general  conviction  of  its  priority.  The 
prophecy  (Matt.  xxiv.  15-22)  refers  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem  by  the  Roman  army,  and  contains 
a  warning  to  escape  from  the  horrors  of  its  siege 

*  I  Chr.  iv.  31,  39-43. 


PROPHECY.  175 

and  capture.  It  happened  that  after  the  investment 
of  the  city  there  was  a  temporary  suspension  of  the 
siege,  and  the  followers  of  our  Lord,  warned  by  this 
prophecy,  escaped  to  the  little  town  of  Pella  and 
were  delivered.  The  Jews  who  did  not  accept  His 
authority  remained  and  suffered  the  woes  He  had 
predicted.  Here  again  is  a  definite  prophecy,  under- 
stood and  acted  upon  before  the  event. 

There  are  also  other  reasons  why  we  must  either 
accept  the  fact  of  prophecy  or  else  regard  the 
prophets  as  conscious  deceivers.  Kuenen  and  his 
school  have  endeavored  to  show  that  the  prophets 
did  not  conceive  themselves  as  really  foretelling 
future  events,  but  merely  as  clothing  their  teaching  in 
the  form  of  prophecy  for  the  purpose  of  impressing 
it  more  strongly  upon  the  minds  of  the  people.  No 
one,  however,  can  read  the  latter  part  of  Isaiah,  espe- 
cially chaps,  xlv.-xlviii.,  without  seeing  that  the  dec- 
laration beforehand  of  that  which  is  to  be  hereafter 
is  set  forth  as  a  proof  of  the  omniscience  and  su- 
premacy of  God.  It  is  the  test  which  the  Almighty 
has  chosen,  by  which  men  may  try  His  claim  to 
their  allegiance. 

There  are  some  prophecies,  like  those  of  Ezekiel, 
forming  a  series  continued  through  a  considerable 
space  of  time.  The  central  point  of  this  series  in 
Ezekiel  is  the  destruction  of  the  temple  and  city  of 
the  Jews  by  Nebuchadnezzar.  Some  of  his  prophe- 
cies profess  to  have  been  uttered  before  this  event 
and  are  filled  with  warnings  in  view  of  its  approach ; 
others  are  uttered  afterwards,  and  are  occupied  with 
exhortations  based  upon  its  accomplishment.     Many 


176  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

of  these  prophecies  are  distinctly  dated.  Is  it  con- 
ceivable that  such  a  series,  unless  true,  could  be 
given  without  intentional  deceit  ? 

Again  :  there  are  great  and  broad  prophecies,  such 
as  that  of  the  coming  of  the  Redeemer,  which  underlie 
the  whole  Old  Testament  economy,  which  human 
sagacity  only  foresaw  in  the  most  dim  and  vague 
way  as  it  was  enlightened  by  the  tradition  of  the 
primeval  promises,  yet  which  have  been  fulfilled,  and 
on  their  fulfilment  rests  the  whole  structure  of  our 
religion. 

It  may,  therefore,  be  fairly  considered  as  a  settled 
point  that  the  Scriptures  are  committed  to  the  asser- 
tion that  future  events  are  therein  predicted.  This 
has  been  so  understood  by  the  vast  mass  of  their 
readers  in  all  ages ;  it  is  the  express  declaration, 
often  repeated,  of  the  New  Testament  writers  con- 
cerning the  prophecies  of  old  ;  and  it  can  only  be 
set  aside  by  a  critical  subtilty  in  plain  violation  of 
the  dictates  of  common  sense. 

The  next  question,  and  the  only  other  one  which 
needs  to  be  here  considered,  is.  How  were  these 
prophecies  given?  To  this  the  answer  must  be,  in 
various  ways,  (i)  By  distinct  utterances  plainly  de- 
claring in  so  many  words  what  was  to  be  hereafter. 
Of  this  there  are  very  many  instances  ;  but  it  is  alto- 
gether immaterial  whether  the  language  of  the  proph- 
ecy be  couched  in  terms  of  the  future,  or  whether 
its  character  of  futurity  is  left  to  be  understood  from 
the  connection  and  the  circumstances  under  which  it 
was  spoken.  Of  the  former  many  examples  will  at 
once  occur  to  the  mind,  as  Mai.  iv.  5  :  '*  Behold  I  will 


PROPHECY.  I'jy 

send  you  Elijah  the  prophet,  before  the  coming  of  the 
great  and  dreadful  day  of  the  Lord."  Gen.  xlix.  lo  : 
"■  The  sceptre  shall  not  depart  from  Judah,  nor  a  law- 
giver from  between  his  feet,  until  Shiloh  come,"  and 
many  others.  Of  the  latter,  a  marked  instance  is  in 
Ps.  ex.  I,  where  the  words  in  their  mere  form  give  no 
indication  of  futurity,  but  the  idea  ''  The  Lord  said 
unto  my  lord  "  could  only  be  realized  in  something 
far  beyond  any  present  experience. 

(2)  But  it  results  from  the  essential  connection  be- 
tween the  Old  and  the  New  Dispensations  that  many 
other  ways  of  foreshadowing  the  future  must  have 
been  open  to  the  preparatory  covenant.  Prominent 
among  these  must  have  been  all  those  institutions 
and  ordinances  which  were  in  their  nature  temporary, 
but  given  for  the  express  purpose  of  leading  men  to 
their  perfect  and  sufficient  realization  in  the  future. 
Among  these  the  institutions  of  sacrifice  and  of  the 
priesthood  hold  the  most  prominent  place  and  have 
already  been  treated  at  length.  They  were  neces- 
sarily and  from  their  very  nature  prophetic,  and  are 
constantly  so  regarded  in  the  New  Testament.  We 
must  suppose  these  to  have  been  prominent  in  that 
teaching  of  our  Lord  to  the  two  disciples  on  the  way 
to  Emmaus,  when,  "  Beginning  at  Moses  and  all  the 
prophets,  He  expounded  unto  them  in  all  the  Script- 
ures the  things  concerning  Himself."  * 

(3)  Closely  connected  with  this  are  those  partic- 
ular acts  and  events  on  the  border-land  between 
prophecies  and  types  which  have  been  fitly  called 
prophetic  types.     In    some   of   these   there   was   a 

*  Luke,  xxiv.  27. 
12 


1/8  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

direct  teaching  of  the  people  to  whom  they  were 
given  of  the  truths  afterwards  to  be  more  fully  re- 
vealed in  the  Gospel.  Thus  by  the  manna  in  the 
wilderness  Israel  was  taught  "  that  man  doth  not 
live  by  bread  alone,  but  by  every  word  that  proceed- 
eth  out  of  the  mouth  of  God.""^  This  may  be 
called  a  prophecy  in  act  of  the  support  afterwards 
to  be  furnished  from  God  to  sustain  His  Church 
in  its  wanderings  through  the  wilderness  of  the 
world.  It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  the  people 
of  old  could  have  understood  the  prophetic  force  of 
such  acts,  except  in  so  far  as  they  learned  by  them 
truths  which  were  afterwards  to  be  more  clearly 
revealed.  In  some  cases,  as  in  that  of  Jonah, f 
there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  the  event  could  have 
suggested  to  the  people  of  the  time  anything  in  the 
future ;  and  it  becomes  prophetic  only  when  made 
so  by  being  established  in  the  New  Testament  times 
as  a  sign.  There  are  few,  if  any  other,  instances  of 
this  class. 

(4)  All  those  parts  of  the  Sinaitic  legislation 
which  were  of  an  educational  character  were  neces- 
sarily prophetic,  in  the  same  sense  in  which  all  edu- 
cation is  prophetic,  of  the  ends  which  it  is  given  to 
subserve ;  only  in  this  case  the  ends  were  divinely 
proposed  and  certain  to  be  accomplished.  The  pro- 
phetic character  in  this  case  may  not  be  distinctly 
recognized  by  those  who  are  under  the  training,  but 
is  clearly  seen  when  it  has  done  its  work,  and  may 
then  be  referred  to  in  its  true  import. 

(5)  The  same  thing  is  true  of  a  history  leading 
*  Matt.  iv.  4.  f  lb.  xii.  39,  40  ;  xvi.  4. 


PROPHECY.  179 

up  to  a  fore-ordained  end,  declared  from  the  begin- 
ning. As  each  stage  of  that  history  is  unrolled  in 
the  course  of  time,  it  becomes  prophetic  of  the  end 
towards  which  it  is  leading.  Its  purport  is  clear  in 
proportion  as  that  end  is  distinctly  seen ;  but  its 
full  prophetic  value  becomes  obvious  only  in  its 
consummation.  Hence  in  this,  as  in  some  other 
methods,  prophecy  is  only  seen  in  its  full  value 
when  looked  back  upon  from  the  times  of  the  New 
Testament,  and  it  is  plain  that  much  might  then  be 
truly  claimed  as  prophecy  which  had  been  only 
dimly,  or  not  at  all,  recognized  in  that  character 
while  it  was  actually  transpiring.  This  is  necessarily 
true  of  secular  as  well  as  of  sacred  history.  In  both 
the  guiding  hand  of  the  Lord  of  all  is  seen  over- 
ruling all  things  to  the  accomplishment  of  His 
purposes.  Could  we,  too,  see  the  end  from  the 
beginning,  we  should  see  that,  as  each  event  advan- 
ces one  step  towards  the  destined  end,  it  is  pro- 
phetic of  that  end ;  and  this  we  can  see,  in  looking 
back  upon  the  past,  in  so  far  as  the  Divine  purposes 
have  been  unfolded  to  our  sight.  In  the  prevalence 
of  Greek  culture  and  literature  under  the  successors 
of  Alexander,  and  in  the  wide  subjection  of  the 
world  to  the  sway  of  imperial  Rome,  we  can  see  the 
preparation  for,  and  therefore,  the  prophecy  of,  an 
universal  religion.  This  kind  of  prophecy  is  not 
unlike  what  are  often  described  as  the  prophecies  of 
nature.  The  earlier  stages  of  creation  were  arranged 
to  lead  to  the  later,  and  were  therefore  prophetic  of 
them.  The  so-called  "  comprehensive  type "  was 
prophetic   of   the   several  more  specialized  genera 


l80  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

into  which  it  should  afterwards  be  divided.  The 
bud  is  prophetic  of  the  flower  and  the  fruit.  The 
embryo  is  prophetic  of  the  child,  and  the  child  of 
the  man. 

(6)  From  the  relations  existing  between  the 
kingdom  of  God  and  the  opposing  world,  always 
essentially  the  same,  much  that  was  declared  of 
them  at  any  one  time  must  necessarily  be  true  at  all 
times.  Hence,  what  was  said  of  these  of  old,  and  of 
the  actors  in  them,  especially  of  David  as  the  head 
of  the  theocracy,  is  prophetic  of  the  Church  of 
Christ  and  its  Head ;  not  prophetic  in  the  sense 
that  the  words  spoken  of  old  had  an  immediate  and 
direct  reference  to  the  future,  but  that  this  future 
reference  is  necessarily  involved  in  the  very  nature 
of  the  case.  Sometimes  this  future  bearing  was 
Divinely  pointed  out  either  at  the  time  or  after- 
wards, but  still  before  the  great  fulfilment,  and 
sometimes  it  was  left  to  be  manifested  in  the 
future.  Thus  the  priesthood  of  Melchisedec  did 
not,  in  the  time  of  Abraham,  necessarily  convey  the 
idea  of  anything  beyond  ;  but  when,  in  the  time  of 
David,  it  was  declared  of  his  greater  descendant, 
"  Thou  art  a  priest  forever  after  the  order  of  Mel- 
chisedec," ^  his  priesthood  became  prophetic  of  that 
of  Christ.  On  the  other  hand,  the  relation  of  the 
child  of  the  bond-maid,  Hagar,  to  that  of  the  child 
of  Sarah,  which  was  by  promise,  did  not  in  itself 
show  that  this  relation  should  be  repeated,  but  only 
that  if  such  a  relation  should  again  occur,  the  same 
principles  in  regard  to  it  would  again  have  place. 
*  Ps.  ex.  4. 


PROPHECY.  151 

The  striking  application  given  to  this  truth  by  St. 
Paul  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,*  rests  upon  the 
fact  that  the  same  relation  of  heirship  according  to 
the  flesh  and  heirship  according  to  promise,  had  re- 
curred in  the  Jewish  and  the  Christian  Church,  and 
therefore  that  the  application  of  the  principle  in- 
volved in  the  events  of  old  became  prophetic  of  the 
application  of  the  same  principle,  which  must  always 
hold. 

Such  prophetic  applications  of  the  history  of  old 
are  quite  common  in  the  New  Testament,  and 
although  sometimes  thoughtlessly  made  the  ground 
of  objections,  are  evidently  perfectly  legitimate,  and 
the  arguments  based  upon  them  are  sound  and 
forcible. 

Having  thus  briefly  sketched  some  of  the  more 
important  forms  of  prophecy,  we  must  now  turn  to 
the  New  Testament  to  observe  how  the  prophecies 
are  treated  there  before  we  can  take  up  the  relation 
between  the  two  involved  in  prophecy.  Little  more 
will  need  to  be  said  about  the  relation  when  the 
facts  upon  which  it  depends  are  fairly  before  us. 

First  of  all,  a  small  number  of  quotations  in  the 
New  Testament  which  have  occasioned  much  con- 
troversy, but  which  really  have  no  bearing  on  the 
subject,  must  be  wholly  set  aside  in  the  present  dis- 
cussion. It  is  customary,  and  has  been  in  all  ages 
and  among  all  people,  to  quote  from  the  Bible  or 
from  any  other  well-known  records  of  the  past,  pas- 
sages which  fitly  describe  events  of  the  present,  and 
*Gal.  iv.  21-31. 


1 82  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

apply  them,  without  any  thought  of  suggesting  that 
these  present  events  were  in  the  view  of  the  writer 
quoted.  How  frequently  have  David's  words  at  the 
death  of  Abner,  **  Know  ye  not  that  there  is  a 
prince  and  a  great  man  fallen  this  day  in  Israel  ?  "  ^ 
been  applied  to  the  death  of  some  great  leader  or 
ruler  in  our  own  day,  and  that  oftentimes  with  the 
expression,  *'  To-day  are  these  words  fulfilled."  How 
many  a  stirring  exhortation  to  progress  in  the  Chris- 
tian life  has  been  addressed  to  those  who  have  just 
sealed  their  baptismal  vows,  from  the  command  to 
Moses,  "■  Speak  to  the  children  of  Israel  that  they 
go  forward."  f  The  application  of  such  passages  to 
our  own  time  is  justified,  as  I  have  said,  by  the  com- 
mon consent  of  devout  men  in  all  ages  ;  nor  is  any 
one  misled  by  the  formula  in  connection  with  them, 
"  these  words  are  now  fulfilled."  Remembering  that 
the  New  Testament  writers  were  all  devout  men, 
familiar  all  their  lives  with  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old 
Testament,  we  have  no  right  to  cut  them  off  from 
such  a  use  of  the  language  of  the  sacred  writers — 
which  was  common  to  all  their  countrymen.  Of 
course  such  quotations  cannot  be  used  argumenta- 
tively,  to  show  that  any  event  or  truth  was  foreseen, 
nor  are  they  ever  so  used  in  the  New  Testament,  as 
any  fair  interpretation  will  show.  They  serve  only 
for  illustration,  or  even  for  the  mere  expression  of 
what  the  writer  would  say  in  the  familiar  words  of 
the  sacred  books.  Why  the  right  of  thus  using  them 
should  be  denied  to  the  New  Testament  writers 
alone  of  all  mankind,  it  is  hard  to  understand.     Pas- 

*  2  Sam.  iii.  38.  f  Ex.  xiv.  15. 


PROPHECY,  183 

sages  of  this  kind  are  comparatively  infrequent. 
When  they  occur,  they  consist  sometimes  of  a  mere 
use  of  the  words  of  the  Old  Testament,  without  any 
formula  of  quotation  whatever,  as  when  St.  Paul 
writes  to  the  Corinthians,"^  '*  Wherefore  come  out 
from  among  them,  and  be  ye  separate,  saith  the 
Lord,  and  touch  not  the  unclean  thing,  and  I  will 
receive  you,"  although  this  might  be  classed  under 
the  educational  precepts  mentioned  below  as  having 
a  prophetic  character.  Sometimes  they  are  intro- 
duced with  the  remark  "  it  is  written,"  as  in  the  First 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians :  f  **  Death  is  swallowed 
up  in  victory.  Oh  death,  where  is  thy  sting?  O 
grave,  where  is  thy  victory?"  and  sometimes  they 
have  the  formulas  ''  thus  was  fulfilled,"  or  ^'  that  it 
might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken,"  as  when  St. 
Matthew  writes,  ".  Then  was  fulfilled  that  which  was 
spoken  by  Jeremy  the  prophet,  saying,  *  In  Rama 
was  there  a  voice  heard,  lamentation,  and  weeping, 
and  great  mourning  :  Rachel  weeping  for  her  chil- 
dren, and  would  not  be  comforted,  because  they  are 
not.' "  X 

Sometimes,  in  consequence  of  the  deep  under- 
lying connection  between  the  Old  and  New  Dis- 
pensations, there  are  quotations  of  a  doubtful  char- 
acter. They  may  belong  to  the  class  which  has 
just  been  described,  or  they  may  be  intended  to 
bring  to  the  light  that  underlying  connection.  A 
marked  instance  of  this  occurs  only  a  few  verses 
before  the  one  last  cited.     Speaking  of  the  sojourn 

*  2  Cor.  vi.  17, 18,  cf.  Isa.  lii.  11 .      f  i  Cor   xv.  56,  cf .  Hos.  xiii.  14. 
X  Matt.  ii.  17,  18,  cf.  Jer.  xxxi.  15. 


1 84  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

of  the  Infant  Jesus  in  Egypt,  St.  Matthew  writes, 
"  That  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  of  the 
Lord  by  the  prophet,  saying,  Out  of  Egypt  have  I 
called  my  Son."  *  No  one  can  fairly  deny  the  right 
of  the  Evangelist  to  have  quoted  these  words  simply 
as  an  apt  expression  of  what  occurred.  Possibly 
this  is  all  that  is  meant,  but  there  may  also  have 
been  a  much  deeper  meaning  in  his  words.  There 
is  no  doubt  that  Hosea  is  here  speaking  not  prophet- 
ically, but  simply  historically  of  the  Exodus  of  the 
Israelites  from  Egypt.  But  with  what  propriety 
does  God  speak  of  this  people  as  ''  My  Son  "  ?  Be- 
cause they  were  His  Church,  the  Body  of  which  the 
Only  Begotten  Son  was  the  Head.  Their  sonship 
was  because  they  partook  of  His  Sonship.  Hence 
it  may  well  have  been  that  St.  Matthew,  realizing 
this  fact,  felt  that  the  words  of  Hosea  became  true 
in  a  fuller  sense  than  he  knew  when  the  Son  Him- 
self incarnate  was  called  out  of  Egypt. 

For  our  present  purpose  we  may  put  quite  aside 
all  such  instances  in  which  the  quotation  is  either  a 
mere  use  of  the  Old  Testament  for  illustration,  or  a 
simple  expression  of  the  writer's  thoughts  in  its  lan- 
guage. Only  such  passages  are  to  be  considered  as 
are  plainly  cited  for  their  prophetic  value. 

Among  these  a  large  number  consist  of  quotations 
from  the  Old  Testament  prophets  of  distinct  expres- 
sions foretelling  the  things  of  the  New.  These  are 
familiar  and  abound  in  almost  every  book  of  the 
New  Testament.  Once  having  recognized  prophecy 
as  a  part  of  the  Revelation  of  God,  there  is  no  diffi- 

*  Matt.  ii.  15.  cf.  Hos.  xi.  i. 


PROPHECY.  185 

culty  with  these.  The  prophets  of  old  foretold  the 
things  that  were  to  be  ;  the  Evangelists  and  inspired 
teachers  of  the  Gospel  recognized  these  predictions 
and  told  of  their  fulfilment.  Only  it  is  not  to  be  sup- 
posed that  the  New  Testament  writers  have  cited  all 
such  prophecies.  They  have  mentioned  only  those 
which  came  in  their  way — those  of  which  the  subject 
they  had  in  hand  naturally  led  them  to  speak. 
Others  remain  for  our  instruction.  The  very  dis- 
tinct prophecy  of  the  seventy  weeks  to  be  fulfilled 
before  the  Messiah's  coming,  for  example,  is  no- 
where quoted  ;  and  so  of  many  others.  There  is  no 
treatise  on  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy.  Only  here 
and  there,  as  their  fulfilment  happens  to  be  noted, 
is  one  and  another  of  the  utterances  of  old  called  to 
mind.  It  is  moreover  to  be  observed  that  the  vari- 
ous writers  differ  much  from  one  another  in  their 
habit  in  this  respect,  especially  in  view  of  the  per- 
sons for  whom  they  more  immediately  wrote.  St. 
Matthew  and  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  He- 
brews, writing  for  those  always  familiar  with  the 
older  Scriptures,  quote  from  them  abundantly  ;  while 
St.  Mark,  having  in  view  rather  Romans,  little  inter- 
ested in  Jewish  literature,  after  the  first  few  verses 
of  his  Gospel,  does  not  from  beginning  to  end  make 
a  single  quotation  of  his  own  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment;  while  St.  John,  with  his  deep  spirituality,  de- 
lights to  cite  prophecies  which  only  become  clear 
after  some  reflection  upon  the  deeper  meaning  of 
the  words  uttered  of  old. 

Next  to  these  citations  of  direct  prophetic  utter- 
ances come  the  references  to  the  institutions  of  the 


1 86  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

Old  Testament  as  declaring  beforehand  those  of  the 
New.  The  most  prominent  instances  of  this  are  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  these  are  accom- 
panied with  a  full  and  sufficient  argument  to  show 
how  and  why  they  were  prophetic.  In  regard  to 
the  sacrifices,  for  example,  it  is  shown  that  since 
they  were  insufficient  in  themselves  for  the  accom- 
plishment of  their  purpose,  and  yet  established  the 
principle  that  "  without  shedding  of  blood  is  no  re- 
mission "  of  sin,  they  necessarily  made  it  manifest 
that  there  should  be  a  sufficient  sacrifice  ;  and  this 
having  been  so  perfectly  fulfilled  in  the  offering  of 
Christ  "  once  for  all,"  it  was  to  His  sacrifice  and  to 
His  alone  that  they  pointed.  The  Aaronic  priest- 
hood is  treated  in  the  same  way,  as  looking  forward 
to  a  better  and  enduring  priesthood  after  the  order 
of  Melchisedec.  But  there  are  many  other  passages 
in  the  New  Testament  in  which  only  passing  allu- 
sion is  made  to  the  institutions  of  old,  and  which 
some  writers  would  consider  as  merely  illustrations. 
These  institutions,  however,  were,  on  the  basis  of 
the  principles  just  laid  down,  truly  prophetic,  and 
there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  Apostles  meant  to 
refer  to  them  in  this  point  of  view.  When  St.  Paul 
wrote  to  the  Corinthians,  **  For  even  Christ  our  Pass- 
over is  sacrificed  for  us  ;  therefore  let  us  keep  the 
feast,  not  with  old  leaven,  neither  with  the  leaven  of 
malice  and  wickedness;  but  with  the  unleavened 
bread  of  sincerity  and  truth,"  *  his  language  might 
indeed  be  amply  justified  as  simply  an  illustration  of 
exceeding  beauty;  but  remembering  how  deeply  he 
*  I  Cor.  V.  7,  8. 


PROPHECY.  187 

had  considered  the  whole  prophetic  character  of  the 
old  Dispensation,  one  can  hardly  fail  to  see  that  he 
referred  to  the  Passover  in  its  necessarily  prophetic 
bearing,  and  to  its  accompanying  ritual  as  embodying 
in  outward  symbol  a  deep  teaching  of  Christian  truth. 
St.  Paul,  trained  from  childhood  in  the  shadows  of 
the  old  revelation,  especially  enlightened  by  the  Holy 
Spirit  to  discern  their  meaning,  and  with  a  clear  and 
bold  reasoning  faculty,  is,  perhaps,  of  all  the  New 
Testament  writers,  the  one  who  most  delightii  to 
bring  out  this  kind  of  prophecy. 

The  prophetic  character  of  single  acts  and  events 
may  be  better  treated  under  the  head  of  typology  ; 
yet  one  illustration  may  be  given  here.  Our  Lord 
refers  to  the  manna  of  old  when  speaking  of  Him- 
self as  "  the  living  Bread  which  came  down  from 
heaven."  ^  Certainly  this  was  a  very  indefinite 
prophecy  to  the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness ;  yet  it 
did  teach  them  that  God  knew  their  wants  and 
would  provide  for  their  needs.  Now,  when  we  find 
man's  highest  needs  met  by  the  gift  of  Christ,*'  Who 
is  our  life,"  we  see  that  this  indefinite  promise  of  old 
is  made  definite  in  Him,  and  is  thus  prophetic  of 
Him.  Such  prophecies,  indeed,  have  only  a  second- 
ary character.  They  do  not  stand  out  simply  and 
by  themselves,  but  require  to  be  taken  in  connection 
with  other  circumstances,  or  explained  by  argument ; 
yet  they  are  by  no  means  of  little  importance  on 
this  account,  nor  of  small  value  in  the  links  which 
bind  the  two  Dispensations  together  in  one  vast 
plan  for  the  salvation  of  men. 

*  John,  vi.  48,  49. 


1 88  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

The  educational  laws  of  the  Mosaic  legislation 
may  be  thought,  at  first  view,  a  still  niore  indistinct 
kind  of  prophecy.  Yet  since  they  set  forth  the  will 
of  God  in  such  terms  as  the  people  of  the  time  were 
able  to  understand,  they  must  needs  prophesy  of 
what  shall  be  the  declaration  of  that  will  when  more 
clearly  revealed.  Sometimes  in  the  New  Testament 
the  prophetic  character  of  such  precepts  is  distinctly 
brought  out,  as  in  St.  Paul's  quotation  of  the  law, 
*'  Thou  shalt  not  muzzle  the  mouth  of  the  ox  that 
treadeth  out  the  corn  ;"  "^  but  more  frequently  the 
precept  of  old  is  simply  cited  in  its  higher  applica- 
tion to  the  Christian,  as  in  the  quotation  from  Prov- 
erbs f  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans, ;[:  **  If  thine 
enemy  hunger,  feed  him ;  if  he  thirst,  give  him 
drink ;  for  in  so  doing  thou  shalt  heap  coals  of  fire 
on  his  head."  Such  quotations  are  not  infrequent 
throughout  the  New  Testament,  and  are  particularly 
apt  to  be  made  in  the  form  of  the  Septuagint  trans- 
lation. 

Beside  the  prophecies  of  history  already  men- 
tioned, there  is  another  kind  :  direct  prophecies  are 
given  of  a  nearer  historical  future,  which,  when  ac- 
complished, becomes  itself  prophetic  of  a  more  dis- 
tant future.  Both  kinds  are  used  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament. To  the  former  belong  the  story  of  God's 
care  for  the  Church  in  the  wilderness,  the  rest  of 
Canaan,  the  deliverance  from  surrounding  enemies, 
and  the  restoration  from  the  captivity.  All  these, 
and   many    other    experiences,  were   steps   in   the 

*  I  Cor.  ix.  9  ;  i  Tim.  v.  i8  ;  cf.  Deut.  xxv.  4. 
f  Prov,  xxv.  21,  22,  X  Rom.  xii.  20, 


PROPHECY.  189 

working  out  of  the  great  plan  of  the  redemption  ©f 
mankind,  and  just  in  so  far  as  this  was  the  case,  be- 
came prophetic  of  that  result.     Some  of  these  are 
referred  to  in  the  New  Testament  in  this  light,  and 
others  may  be  used  by  us  in  the   same  way.     This 
prophetic  purpose  is  sometimes  made  clear  even  in 
the  older  Scriptures.    Thus,  that  the  rest  of  Canaan 
was  not  the  end  of  the  promise,  but  only  the  means 
to  a  further  end,  is  shown  by  the  argument  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews*  that  the  rest  was  still  de- 
clared to  be  future,  long  after  Canaan  had  been  in 
the  possession  of  the  chosen  people.f   Yet  only  here 
and  there  is  the  argument  thus  developed ;  for  the 
most  part  it  remains  to  be  worked  out  by  those  who 
attentively  consider  the  declaration  of  God's  purposes 
and  the  history  of  their  fulfilment.   To  the  other  kind 
of  historical  prophecy  belong  all  those  predictions  of 
the  near  future  in  terms  which  catch  their  glow  and 
force  from  the  more  distant  times  to  which  they  are 
the  preparatory  steps,  and  of  which  they  therefore 
form  a  necessary  part.  Such  are  the  glowing  descrip- 
tions of  the  kingdom  of  Solomon  in  the  72d  Psalm, 
in  which  the  prophet  looks  through   the  immediate 
to  the  final   and  eternal  kingdom  of  Israel.     Such, 
also,  are  the  prophecies  of  the  Church  of  the  restora- 
tion from  the  exile,  which  look  to  that  Church  not 
merely  as  it  should  be  in  the  days  of  Shealtiel  and 
Zerubbabel,  but  as  it  should  grow  from  that  stage  of 
its  progress  into  the  Messianic  kingdom,  and  even 
beyond,  until    it    should    at    last    develop   into   the 
heavenly  Jerusalem,  the  Church  triumphant  above. 

*  Heb.  iii.  15— iv.  13-  t  ^s.  xcv.  7,  8. 


1 90         THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

In  studying  such  prophecies,  and  also  those  of  the 
New  Testament  which  sometimes  similarly  connect 
the  beginning  and  the  end,  it  is  always  to  be  remem- 
bered how  feebly  ideas  of  time  have  always  been 
developed  in  the  Oriental  mind,  and  how  much  more 
engrossing  and  important  has  been  that  of  purpose. 
It  made  but  little  difference  when  the  Divine  prom- 
ises were  to  be  fulfilled  ;  the  great  question  was 
what  they  should  be.  They  realized  that  with  God 
"  one  day  is  as  a  thousand  years,  and  a  thousand 
years  as  one  day,"  and  therefore  they  often  describe 
in  one  breath,  as  it  were,  the  preparatory  stages  and 
the  ultimate  result.  We,  from  the  character  of  our 
mental  habits,  attach  more  weight  to  the  distinc- 
tions of  time.  Moreover,  in  an  advanced  stage  of  the 
preparation,  we  are  able  to  separate  the  work  more 
distinctly  into  its  parts ;  they  viewed  it  from  before- 
hand as  a  whole.  The  New  Testament  writers  lived 
between.  They  justly  claimed  such  prophecies  as 
fulfilled  when  the  great,  fundamental  point  of  their 
fulfilment  was  accomplished,  though  much  still  re- 
mained to  be  done.  At  the  Council  of  Jerusalem 
concerning  the  admission  of  the  Gentiles  to  the 
Church,  St.  James  claimed  ^  the  fulfilment  of  the 
prophecy,  *'  After  this  I  will  return,  and  will  build 
again  the  tabernacle  of  David,  which  is  fallen  down; 
and  I  will  build  the  ruins  thereof,  and  I  will  set  it 
up:  that  the  residue  of  men  might  seek  after  the 
Lord,  and  all  the  Gentiles,  upon  whom  My  name  is 
called."  t  This  was  spoken  by  Amos  with  a  primary 
reference  to  the  restoration  from  the  Babylonian  cap- 

*  Acts,  XV.  15.  f  Amos,  ix.  11,  12. 


PROPHECY.  191 

tivity ;  but  that  was  only  a  step  to  its  accomplish- 
ment. Its  great  fulfilment  was  when  Christ  laid  down 
His  life  a  ransom  for  all.  Its  realization  began  when 
the  doors  of  His  Church  were  thrown  open  freely  to 
Gentile  believers — the  precise  point  of  time  when  St. 
James  cited  its  promise.  From  that  day  to  this  it  has 
been  in  ever  progressive  fulfilment ;  but  its  end  is  not 
yet,  and  we  still  cite  it  as  a  promise  and  a  prophecy 
which  each  successive  generation  sees  more  and 
more  completely  fulfilled. 

Finally,  there  are  passages  cited  as  prophecies  in 
the  New  Testament  which  have,  on  their  face,  as  we 
read  them  in  the  Old,  no  prophetic  character ;  but 
simply  speak  of  persons  and  circumstances  as  they 
existed  at  the  time.  David,  in  the  second  Psalm,  * 
asks,  "  Why  do  the  heathen  rage,  and  the  people 
imagine  a  vain  thing  ?  The  kings  of  the  earth  set 
themselves,  and  the  rulers  take  counsel  together 
against  the  Lord  and  against  His  Anointed."  So 
far  all  this  was  true  of  David  himself;  and  although 
the  Psalm  goes  on  with  language  which  indicates 
in  David  a  consciousness  of  a  higher  and  a  future 
reference,  yet  it  is  this  first  part  of  the  Psalm  which 
is  quoted  by  the  Christians  and  applied  to  the  op- 
position of  the  Jews  when  Peter  and  John  had  been 
arrested,  threatened,  and  unwillingly  released  by 
the  Sanhedrim. f  They  did  so  with  good  reason; 
for  David  in  his  time  was  the  head  of  the  theocracy 
and  represented  the  Church  of  God  as  opposed  by 
heathen  enmity.  What  was  true  of  him  in  this 
capacity  must   necessarily  be  true  in  the  same  rela- 

*  Ps.  ii.  I,  2.  f  Acts,  iv,  13-26. 


192  THE  OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

tion  of  his  greater  descendant,  the  true  Head  of 
the  Church.  What  David  then  says  of  himself  in 
such  a  relation  is  prophetic  of  Him  who  in  a  higher 
way  stood  in  the  same  relation.  Prophecies  of  this 
kind  are  frequently  cited.  They  sometimes  contain 
in  their  language  evidence  of  their  intended  appli- 
cation to  the  future  ;  sometimes  their  words  relate 
directly  only  to  the  present.  This  does  not  matter. 
The  prophecy  is  essentially  in  the  thing  and  not  in 
the  mere  words.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that 
the  thoughts  of  the  Psalmist  went  beyond  himself 
when  he  wrote  of  them  "  that  hate  me  without  a 
cause ;"  *  yet  the  beloved  disciple  did  not  err  when 
he  applied  the  saying  to  One  against  whom  hatred 
was  more  causeless  than  against  David.f 

After  considering  these  various  kinds  of  prophecy 
as  they  are  written  in  the  Old  Testament  and  as 
they  are  quoted  in  the  New,  nothing  more  need 
be  said  as  to  the  prophetic  connection  between  the 
two.  It  is  plain  that  the  inspired  writers  of  the  Old 
Testament  understood  sometimes  very  fully  "  that 
not  unto  themselves  but  unto  us  they  did  minister 
the  things  which  are  now  reported  unto  you  by 
them  that  have  preached  the  Gospel ;":[  and  it  is 
correspondingly  plain  that  the  inspired  writers  of 
the  New  Testament  looked  upon  Christianity  as  the 
outcome  and  designed  fulfilment  of  the  entire  old 
Dispensation,  and  therefore  upon  that  Dispensation 
as  in  every  part  more  or  less  clearly  prophetic. 
These    facts   are   always   to  be  recognized    in    the 

*  Ps.  Ixix,  4,  cf.xxxv.  19.         f  John,  xv.  25.         %  i  Pet.  i.  12. 


PROPHECY.  193 

study  of  the  use  of  the  Old  Testament  In  the  New. 
There  are  amply  enough  of  plain  and  express  proph- 
ecies to  give  a  firm  basis  for  this  more  widely 
extended  prophetic  relation ;  but  we  should  quite 
fail  to  enter  into  the  spirit  of  the  New  Testament 
writers,  if  we  did  not  recognize  that  they  took  this 
wider  view,  and  freely  considered  everything  in  the 
older  Dispensation  and  Scriptures  that  foreshadowed 
and  led  up  to  the  things  of  Christ  as  essentially,  and 
in  its  very  nature,  prophetic. 

This  broader  use  of  prophecy  appeals  only  to 
those  who  have  already  come  to  appreciate  some- 
thing of  the  relation  in  which  the  two  Dispensations 
stand  to  each  other.  It  is  made  use  of  in  the  New 
Testament  only  for  the  benefit  of  such.  When 
prophecy  is  used  argumentatively,  to  prove  some 
proposition  needing  to  be  established  in  the  mind 
of  the  hearer  or  reader,  either  only  the  more  distinct 
prophecies  in  the  narrower  sense  are  used,  or  else 
they  are  accompanied  by  an  exposition  and  argu- 
ment showing  their  bearing  upon  the  case  in  hand. 
We,  as  Christians,  may  well  follow  this  inspired 
example.  In  our  own  private  thoughts,  and  for  our 
own  edification,  we  may  well  use  alike  the  history, 
the  institutions,  the  precepts,  and  the  sacred  songs 
of  old  as  setting  forth  in  shadow  the  higher  things 
of  the  present  dispensation,  and  these,  again,  as 
showing  us  the  still  higher  glories,  yet  to  come,  of 
the  Church  triumphant ;  yet  care  is  to  be  taken  that 
this  be  done  in  a  reasonable  and  not  in  a  merely 
fanciful  and  sentimental  way,  for  it  is  always  to  be 
remembered  that  the  Gospel  appeals  to  our  reason 
13 


194  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

as  well  as  to  our  feeling,  and  that  we  do  but  weaken 
and  dishonor  it  when  we  appeal  in  its  behalf  to  that 
which  our  reason  cannot  sanction.  In  argument,  in 
establishing  that  which  the  hearer  does  not  yet  ad- 
mit, we  must  confine  ourselves  to  a  narrower  ground, 
and  first  establish  on  clear  evidence  the  Divinely 
arranged  connection  between  the  two  Dispensations 
on  the  basis  of  clear  and  express  declarations  before 
we  can  wisely  go  on  to  use  those  subtler  prophetic 
indications  which  really  fill  the  whole  teaching  of 
"  Moses  and  all  the  prophets." 


LECTURE   IX. 

TYPOLOGY. 
I.  Its  History  and  General  Principles. 

The  treatment  of  the  subject  of  typology  must 
depend  upon  the  definition  of  the  word  type.  There 
has  always  been  and  still  continues  to  be  much  con- 
fusion about  its  meaning,  and  it  will  therefore  be 
well  to  begin  with  a  short  historical  sketch.  This 
would  naturally  start  with  the  Christian  fathers  ;  but 
there  is  a  difficulty  in  representing  their  views  from 
the  fact  that  they  generally  made  little  distinction 
between  two  very  different  things,  allegory  and  type. 
This  confusion  still  remains,  and  the  first  point  there- 
fore must  be  to  make  the  distinction  between  them. 

In  alleeory  it  is  of  no  consequence  whether  the 
things  narrated  really  occurred  or  are  a  fictitious 
story  for  the  purpose  of  setting  forth  the  truth  to 
be  taught.  In  Nathan's  parable  to  bring  home  to 
David's  conscience  the  enormity  of  his  sin,*  it  is  a 
matter  of  indifference  whether  a  poor  man  whose 
one  ewe  lamb  was  seized  by  his  rich  neighbor, 
actually  lived  or  whether  the  story  was  invented  for 
its  purpose.  So  also  with  our  Lord's  parables  ;  it  is 
unnecessary  to  suppose  that  the  events  narrated  in 
them  had  really  occurred,  nor  would  the  supposition 

*  2  Sam.  xii.  1-4. 


ig6  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

that  they  were  narratives  from  actual  life  add  any- 
thing to  the  force  of  their  moral  teaching.  This, 
then,  is  the  first  characteristic  of  allegory :  it  is  in- 
dependent of  the  real  or  fictitious  nature  of  its  nar- 
rative. The  narrative  may  or  may  not  be  true  ;  this 
does  not  affect  its  use.  The  other  characteristic  is 
that  this  narrative,  real  or  fictitious,  is  used  for  the 
conveyance  of  a  meaning  of  a  different  and  a  higher 
kind. 

Types,  on  the  other  hand,  presuppose,  as  essential, 
the  reality  of  the  facts,  institutions,  or  circumstances 
on  which  they  are  based,  or  at  least  the  conviction 
of  their  reality  on  the  part  of  both  the  speaker  and 
the  hearer.  Further,  the  type  does  not,  like  the 
allegory,  involve  a  different  sense  ;  but  only  a  differ- 
ent and  higher  application  of  the  same  sense.  This 
will  be  explained  and  illustrated  further  on  ;  for  the 
present  it  must  be  assumed  as  a  characteristic  of  the 
type  in  contradistinction  to  the  allegory. 

Both  these  forms  of  teaching,  the  allegorical  and 
the  typical,  without  much  distinction  between  them, 
were  largely  employed  by  the  Fathers,  especially  by 
the  Greek  Fathers,  Clement  of  Alexandria  and  Ori- 
gen.  It  is  sometimes  hard  to  tell  whether  they 
regarded  the  Old  Testament  narratives  as  literally 
true  or  not,  and  therefore  whether  they  meant  to 
treat  them  as  allegories  or  as  types.  For  illus- 
tration I  quote  a  single  instance  from  Fairbairn's 
Typology"^  of  the  treatment  of  the  same  narra- 
tive by  Origen  and  by  his  master,  Clement.  The 
subject  is  Abraham's  marriage  to  Keturah.  Origen 
*  Bk.  I.,  Chap.  I.,  §  I. 


TYPOLOGY.  197 

says  this  teaches  '^  that  there  is  no  end  to  wisdom, 
and  that  old  age  sets  no  bounds  to  improvement  in 
knowledge.  The  death  of  Sarah  is  to  be  understood 
as  the  perfecting  of  virtue  ;  but  he  who  has  attained 
to  a  consummate  and  perfect  virtue,  must  always 
be  employed  in  some  kind  of  learning — which  learn- 
ing is  called  by  the  divine  word,  his  wife.  Abraham, 
therefore,  when  an  old  man,  and  his  body  in  a  man- 
ner dead,  took  Keturah  to  wife.  I  think  it  was 
better,  according  to  the  exposition  we  follow,  that 
the  wife  should  have  been  received  when  his  body 
was  dead  and  his  members  were  mortified.  For  we 
have  a  greater  capacity  for  wisdom  when  we  bear 
about  the  dying  of  Christ  in  our  mortal  body.  Then 
Keturah,  whom  he  married  in  his  old  age,  is,  by  in- 
terpretation, incense,  or  sweet  odor.  For  he  said, 
even  as  Paul  said,  *  We  are  a  sweet  savor  of  Christ.* 
Sin  is  a  foul  and  putrid  thing;  but  If  any  of  you  in 
whom  this  no  longer  dwells,  have  the  fragrance  of 
righteousness,  the  sweetness  of  mercy,  and  by  prayer 
continually  offer  up  incense  to  God,  ye  also  have 
taken  Keturah  to  wife."  ^  He  goes  on  to  show  how 
many  such  wives  may  be  taken,  hospitality,  care  of 
the  poor,  patience,  and  every  Christian  virtue  being 
a  wife.  On  the  other  hand,  Clement  f  finds  this  in- 
struction in  the  narrative  of  Abraham's  marriage 
successively  to  Sarah  and  to  Hagar:  '*  A  Christian 
ought  to  cultivate  philosophy  and  the  liberal  arts 
before  he  devotes  himself  wholly  to  the  study  of 
divine  wisdom."  The  way  he  takes  to  make  this  out 
is   the  following  :    Abraham  is  the  image  of  a  per- 

*  Origen,  Horn.  vi.  in  Genes,     f  Clement,  Strom.  L.  I.,  p.  333. 


198  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

feet  Christian,  Sarah  the  image  of  Christian  wisdom, 
and  Hagar  the  image  of  philosophy  or  human  wis- 
dom (certainly  a  very  ill-favored  likeness  !).  Abra- 
ham lived  a  long  time  in  a  state  of  connubial  ste- 
rility— whence  it  is  inferred  that  a  Christian,  so  long 
as  he  confines  himself  to  the  study  of  divine  wisdom 
and  religion  alone,  will  never  bring  forth  any  great 
or  excellent  fruits.  Abraham,  then,  with  the  con- 
sent of  Sarah,  takes  to  him  Hagar,  which  proves 
....  that  a  Christian  ought  to  embrace  the  wisdom 
of  this  world,  or  philosophy,  and  that  Sarah,  or  divine 
wisdom,  will  not  withhold  her  consent.  Lastly,  after 
Hagar  had  borne  Ishmael  to  Abraham,  he  resumed 
his  intercourse  with  Sarah,  and  of  her  begat  Isaac ; 
the  true  import  of  which  is,  that  a  Christian,  after 
having  once  thoroughly  grounded  himself  in  human 
learning  and  philosophy,  will,  if  he  then  devote  him- 
self to  the  culture  of  divine  wisdom,  be  capable  of 
propagating  the  race  of  true  Christians,  and  of  ren- 
dering essential  service  to  the  Church. 

The  Western  Church,  attaching  more  importance 
to  the  literal  truth  of  the  Old  Testament  narratives, 
was  far  less  extravagant  in  the  use  of  allegory,  but 
still  sought  types  everywhere,  apparently  guided 
only  by  the  practical  use  that  could  be  made  of 
them  at  the  moment.  Abundant  instances  may  be 
found  even  in  writers  of  such  power  and  good  sense 
as  St.  Augustine.  There  was  no  careful  examina- 
tion of  the  principles  on  which  such  interpretations 
rest,  and  the  example  thus  set  was  foHowed  without 
reflection  during  the  middle  ages,  so  far  as  any  atten- 
tion at  all  was  given  to  the  Scriptures. 


TYPOLOGY.  199 

With  the  great  awakening  at  the  Reformation  a 
reaction  set  in  against  this  arbitrary  treatment  of 
the  older  Scriptures.  The  prominent  writers  of  the 
Reformation  period  protested  in  no  measured  terms 
against  what  they  called  *'  the  licentious  system  "  of 
Origen  and  the  allegorists  ;  yet  their  minds  were  too 
much  occupied  with  other  matters  to  examine  or  de- 
termine the  principles  of  typology,  and  notwithstand- 
ing their  protests,  not  a  little  of  the  same  vicious 
allegorizing  and  typical  explanation  may  be  found 
in  their  writings.  On  the  other  hand,  there  was  at 
the  same  time  such  an  excessive  effort  to  establish 
what  was  called  "■  the  natural  and  obvious  meaning  " 
of  Scripture  that  the  real  sense  of  the  more  enigmat- 
ical prophecies  was  often  lost  to  view.  The  best 
writings  of  the  period  were  characterized  by  a  well- 
meant  effort  to  develop  the  true  sense  of  the  sacred 
writings,  but  without  any  fixed  principles  to  guide 
them  in  regard  to  typology,  and  consequently  much 
uncertainty  and  more  than  doubtful  interpretation. 

In  the  seventeenth  century  arose  what  is  known 
as  the  Cocceian  school,  though  it  began  earlier  than 
the  life  of  Cocceius  himself.  Its  chief  exponents 
were  Glass,  in  his  Philologia  Sacra  ;  Cocceius,  in  his 
Commentaries ;  Witsius  ;  and  Vitringa.  They  re- 
jected the  Alexandrian  theory  of  a  double  sense  of 
Scripture,  and  yet  reached  nearly  the  same  result  by 
a  system  in  which  everything  in  the  Old  Testament 
in  which  any  trace  of  resemblance  could  be  discov- 
ered to  anything  in  the  New  was  considered  as  typi- 
cal. For  example :  Cocceius  understands  Asshur's 
"going  out  and  building  Nineveh  as  a  type  of  the 


200  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

Turk  or  Mussulman  power,  which  at  once  sprang 
from  the  kingdom,  and  shook  the  dominion  of  Anti- 
christ ; "  *  and  the  others  look  upon  the  withdrawal 
of  Isaac  from  his  father's  house  to  the  land  of  Mo- 
riah,  as  a  type  of  Christ's  being  led  out  of  the  tem- 
ple to  Calvary  ;  and  Samson's  meeting  a  young  lion 
by  the  way  and  the  transactions  that  followed,  as  a 
type  of  Christ's  meeting  Saul  on  the  road  to  Damas- 
cus, with  the  train  of  events  succeeding. f 

This  school  of  interpretation  largely  prevailed  in 
England  during  the  seventeenth  and  the  beginning 
of  the  eighteenth  centuries.  Beautiful,  but  exceed- 
ingly fanciful  illustrations  of  it  may  be  found  abun- 
dantly in  the  works  of  Jeremy  Taylor.  The  obvious 
defects  of  this  school  were  :  first,  that  it  furnished  no 
fixed  principles  of  interpretation  ;  and,  secondly,  that 
it  was  based  on  no  true  idea  of  the  connection  be- 
tween the  Old  and  New  Dispensations,  between 
type  and  antitype,  and  thus  led  to  a  dwelling  upon 
merely  superficial  and  external  resemblances,  while 
the  vital  principles  of  the  connection  between  the 
law  and  the  Gospel  were  overlooked. 

The  positions  of  the  Cocceian  school  were  opposed 
by  various  scholars,  and  notably  by  Spencer  in  his 
De  legibus  Hebrceorum^  and  by  Dathe  in  his  edition 
of  Glass  ;  but  their  opposition  went  so  far,  and  even 
true  types  were  so  much  discredited  by  them,  that 
their  views  were  not  generally  adopted.     Gradually, 

*  Cur.  Prior,  in  Gen.  x.  ii. 

f  Glass,  Philol  Sacr.  Lib.  II.  P.  I.  Tract  II.  Sect.  4.  Vitringa, 
Obs.Sac.  Vol.  II.  Lib. VI.  c.  20.  Witsius,  De  (Econom.  Lib.  IV.  c.  6. 
For  these  references  I  am  indebted  to  Fairbairn,  ubi  supra. 


TYPOLOGY.  20I 

however,  as  from  various  causes  the  study  of  the 
Old  Testament  was  more  neglected,  all  typology  fell 
into  neglect.  This  may  have  been  hastened  by  the 
extravagances  of  the  Hutchinsonian  school,  which 
sought  to  find  all  truths,  as  well  of  philosophy  as  of 
science,  concealed  in  the  letter  of  Scripture.  The 
cabalistic  and  extravagant  character  of  this  school, 
so  far  as  it  had  any  effect,  could  only  increase  the 
suspicion  with  which  types  were  already  regarded. 
Another  school  therefore  arose,  of  which  Bishop 
Marsh  was  the  ablest  exponent.  Realizing  that  the 
existing  extravagances  in  typical  interpretation  were 
dishonoring  to  Scripture  and  pernicious  to  religion 
in  the  opinion  of  sensible  men,  and  seeing  no  other 
escape  from  these  absurdities,  he  rejected  all  types 
except  those  expressly  sanctioned  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament. The  earlier  school  sought  Christ  unwisely 
in  everything  contained  in  the  older  Scriptures,  but 
had  the  redeeming  point  of  really  seeking  Him  ; 
the  school  of  Marsh  unwisely  did  not  seek  Him 
there  at  all,  and  was  the  outcome  of  an  essentially 
unchristian  theology.  In  rationalistic  hands  this 
school  finally  denied  all  types,  and  interpreted  those 
expressly  sanctioned  in  the  New  Testament  as  mere 
accommodations  to  Jewish  notions.  Thus  the  true 
connection  between  the  Old  and  New  Testament 
was  broken  in  the  opposite  way  from  the  former 
school,  and  the  words  of  Christ  concerning  the  rela- 
tion of  the  older  Scriptures  to  Himself  were  made 
impossible.  This  school  certainly  offends  less  than 
the  Cocceian  against  good  taste  and  common  sense, 
and   has    less   of  extravagance  to  repel   thoughtful 


202  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

men  ;  but  it  is  cold,  and  hard,  and  dry.  It  is  at 
variance  with  the  teaching  of  the  forty  days,  and  in 
opposition  to  the  analogy  of  the  Apostolic  preach- 
ing and  writings.  If  it  were  the  only  escape  from 
the  capricious  extravagance  of  the  opposite  school, 
it  might  indeed  be  urged  with  some  reason  ;  since 
we  must  believe  that  the  Holy  Spirit  did  intend  to 
convey  some  definite  meaning  in  the  Old  Testament 
Scriptures,  and  not  merely  to  set  forth  a  row  of 
hooks  on  which  each  man  might  hang  his  own  fan- 
tasies. Yet  it  can  never  meet  the  wants  of  the  de- 
vout student's  heart,  nor  even  satisfy  the  minds  of 
those  who  duly  weigh  the  use  made  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament in  the  New ;  since  it  also  fails  to  unfold  the 
real  and  essential  connection  between  them. 

Is,  then,  the  principle  correct  that  we  can  only 
recognize  as  true  types  those  for  which  we  have  in- 
spired authority?  Certainly  not,  for  several  reasons. 
First,  from  the  analogy  of  prophecy.  In  this  closely 
connected  subject  such  a  principle  would  be  clearly 
wrong,  and  the  same  reasoning  applies  here.  As  in 
that  case  enough  prophecies  are  interpreted  to  form 
a  guide  and  model,  and  we  are  then  left  to  interpret 
others  in  the  same  way  (our  Lord  reproving  the  dis- 
ciples because  they  had  not  done  this),  so  in  regard 
to  types.  Enough  of  them  are  treated  in  the  New 
Testament  to  show  the  principles  of  their  use,  and 
it  is  intimated  that  many  more  are  left  untouched. 
In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  ordinary  Christians 
are  reproved  for  their  dulness  in  apprehending 
them,  as  in  the  case  of   Melchisedec."^     Secondly, 

*Heb.  V.  II,  12. 


TYPOLOGY.  203 

the  types  treated  in  the  New  Testament,  though 
quite  numerous,  are  of  such  a  kind  and  are  so 
selected  as  to  leave  the  conviction  that  in  the  minds 
of  the  writers  they  were  only  instances  selected  for 
their  immediate  purpose  from  a  storehouse  of  like 
material.  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews*  this  is 
expressly  afifirmed  of  the  arrangements  of  the  taber- 
nacle, and  it  seems  an  unavoidable  conclusion  from 
the  way  in  which  types  are  cited  everywhere. 
Clearly  the  types  are  there,  if  we  can  only  deter- 
mine with  certainty  where  and  what  they  are.  This 
is  the  critical  point,  and  Bishop  Marsh  urges  with 
reason  that  Scripture  itself  furnishes  the  only  pos- 
sible means  of  distinguishing  between  the  true  and 
the  falsely  alleged  type ;  that  only  by  its  means 
can  we  determine  "  that  two  distant  though  similar 
historical  facts  were  so  connected  in  the  general 
scheme  of  Divine  providence  that  the  one  was 
designed  to  prefigure  the  other."  But  it  is  not 
necessary  that  the  teaching  of  Scripture  should  be 
confined  to  the  particular  types  expressly  cited.  If 
we  can  discover  the  reason  why  those  types  were 
cited,  and  the  principle  of  their  application,  we  may 
surely  accept  other  types  which  have  the  same  rea- 
son and  rest  upon  the  same  principle. 

Meantime,  to  conclude  the  history  of  the  matter, 
it  can  scarcely  be  said  that  there  are  at  present  any 
marked  schools  of  typology  remaining.  Each  indi- 
vidual writer  or  commentator  follows,  more  or  less, 
in  the  footsteps  of  one  or  other  of  the  schools  al- 
ready enumerated  ;  yet  with  the  general   advance- 

*  Heb.  ix.  5. 


204  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

ment  in  sound  principles  of  interpretation,  there  is 
a  growing  recognition  of  the  true  principles  of 
typology.  It  is  not  to  be  expected  that  every  one 
will  come  to  a  perfect  agreement  in  the  application 
of  those  principles  in  detail  to  each  particular  case. 
Differences  arising  from  temperament  or  from  previ- 
ous habits  of  thought  will  always  remain,  just  as 
textual  critics,  having  the  same  authorities  and  the 
same  principles,  will  yet  occasionally  come  to  differ- 
ent conclusions  in  regard  to  some  difficult  and  well- 
balanced  reading.  This  does  not  matter.  The  main 
point  is  that  some  fixed  principles  of  typology 
should  be  determined  and  accepted  ;  and  then  slight 
differences  in  their  application  will  be  of  very  little 
moment."^ 

For  this  purpose  it  is  necessary,  first  of  all,  to  fix 
clearly  the  meaning  of  the  word  type,  and  this  is  so 
important  that  a  somewhat  full  treatment  of  it  may 
be  excused.  It  is  used  in  Scripture  both  in  a  more 
general  and  a  more  restricted  sense.  The  primary 
meaning  of  the  word,  derived  from  tvtctgd,  is  a 
stroke^  and  then  the  impression  left  by  a  stroke,  a 
trace,  ox  print.  In  this  sense  it  is  found  in  John,  xx. 
25,  *'  Except  I  shall  see  in  his  hands  the  print  of  the 
nails,  and  put  my  finger  into  the  print  of  the  nails ; " 
but  it  does  not  occur  in  the  New  Testament  else- 
where in  this  meaning.  From  this  sense  it  came 
naturally  to  be  used  in  the  classics  (and  so  also  in 

*  For  a  valuable  discussion  of  the  whole  subject  of  types,  see  Fair- 
bairn's  Typology  of  Scripture,  2  vols.  8vo.  The  first  part  of  Vol.  I. 
treats  of  the  general  principles  of  Typology,  and  much  of  this  histori- 
cal notice  is  abbreviated  from  Book  I. 


TYPOLOGY.  205 

the  Septuagint)  of  the  stamping  of  coin,  of  pictures, 
and  of  sculpture,  and  hence,  also,  of  monuments, 
statues  and  images.  Thus  it  is  used  by  the  prophet 
Amos,*  and  in  the  passage  quoted  from  him  in  the 
speech  of  St.  Stephen,  '"''figures  which  ye  made  to 
worship  them."f  Closely  akin  to  this  is  the  mean- 
ing pattern^  model,  or  example.  It  bears  this  sense 
in  those  passages  which  speak  of  Moses  as  building 
the  tabernacle  after  the  patterii  shown  him  in  the 
Mount ;":[  in  the  account  of  the  letter  of  Claudius 
to  Fehx,  written  "after  this  manner ;'' %  in  St. 
Paul's  exhortation  to  Titus,  "  showing  thyself  a 
pattern  of  good  works;"!  in  his  statement  in  re- 
counting to  the  Corinthians  the  history  of  old,  that 
"  these  things  were  our  examples,''  and  that  "  all 
these  things  happened  unto  them  for  ensamples  "  \ 
(where  the  better  text  has  the  word  in  the  form  of 
an  adverb) ;  in  his  exhortation  to  the  Philippians, 
"walk  so  as  ye  have  us  for  an  ensample ;  "  -"^  in  his 
speaking  of  the  Thessalonians  ff  as  "  ensamples  to  all 
that  believe  ;  "  and  of  making  himself  "  an  ensample  " 
unto  them  ;  :j::j:  in  his  exhortation  to  Timothy,  "  be 
thou  an  example  of  the  believers ; "  §§  and  in  the 
same  way  in  St.  Peter's  address  to  the  elders, 
"  being  ensamples  to  the  flock."  ||||  The  word  is 
found  in  only  two  other  instances  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament:  in  the  expression,  "ye  have  obeyed  from 

*Amos,  V.  26. 

f  Acts,  vii.  43.   The  same  word  is  used  by  Josephus  (Ant.  I.  ig, 
§11)  of  the  images  of  Rachel. 

X  Acts,  vii.  44  ;  Heb.  viii.  5.     §  Acts,  xxiii.  25.     ||  Titus,  ii.  7. 
1"  I  Cor.  X.  6,  II.  **  Phil.  iii.  17.  ff  i  Thess.  i.  7. 

\X  2  Thess.  iii.  9.  §§  i  Tim.  iv.  12.  |||  i  Pet.  v.  3. 


206  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

the  heart  that  form  of  doctrine  which  was  delivered 
you,"*  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  same  meaning  of 
''pattern  of  doctrine,"  is  to  be  retained,  or  whether 
there  is  here  a  further  derived  sense  of  "compend. 
of  doctrine;"  but  the  sense  can  only  be  one  or  the 
other  of  these.  In  the  only  remaining  instance  of 
the  use  of  the  word,  St.  Paul  speaks  of  Adam, 
"who  is  tht figure  of  Him  that  was  to  come."f  In 
this  passage  the  word  will  easily  bear  the  sense  we 
have  had  all  along,  *'  the  pattern  or  example  of  Him 
that  was  to  come  ;"  or  it  may  be  taken  in  the  more 
technical  sense  of  type,  "  the  one  foreshadowing  and 
setting  forth  Him  that  was  to  come."  As,  however, 
the  latter  sense  is  found  nowhere  else,  the  former 
seems  required  by  the  usus  loqiiendi.  The  two 
senses  are  closely  connected,  and  inasmuch  as 
many  things  of  old  are  spoken  of  as  examples,  and 
those  same  things  did  actually,  in  many  instances, 
foreshadow  the  things  to  come,  the  transition  is 
very  easy  from  the  meaning  of  types  as  simply  ex- 
amples to  that  of  foreshadowing  examples,  though 
strictly  the  word  is  never  so  used  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament. 

There  have  come  to  be  the  two  senses  of  the  word 
in  theological  literature :  (i),  simply  examples ;  (2), 
foreshadowing  examples.  The  former  sense  was 
widely  extended  in  common  use  until  it  came  to 
mean  nothing  more  than  a  mere  reminder,  anything 
that  might  suggest  to  the  thoughts  some  religious 
fact  or  truth.  Thus  the  early  ecclesiastical  writers 
speak  of  the  masts  and  yards  of  a  ship,  or  again  of 
*Rom.  vi.  17.  fRom.  v.  14. 


TYPOLOGY.  207 

the  trunk  and  cross  branches  of  a  tree,  as  *'  types  " 
of  the  cross.  Of  course,  the  word  type  here  can 
have  only  the  sense  of  something  which  suggests  to 
the  mind,  something  which  by  its  external  form 
brings  up  in  the  devout  mind  the  thought  of  the 
cross.  There  is  no  limit  to  types  in  this  sense,  nor 
is  it  possible  to  make  any  systematic  arrangement, 
or  give  any  rational  account  of  such  types,  which 
are  co-extensive  with  the  power  of  association  in  the 
human  mind.  Type  was  employed  in  this  way  in 
early  Christian  literature  not  only  in  regard  to  natu- 
ral objects,  but  also  in  respect  to  the  histories  and 
institutions  of  Scripture.  Everything  in  the  Old 
Testament  became  a  "  type "  which  could  in  any 
way,  however  remotely,  suggest  to  the  mind  any 
fact  or  truth  of  the  Gospel.  Exuberant  fancy  some- 
times carried  such  reminders  to  a  point  where  the 
laws  of  common  sense  seem  to  have  been  quite  for- 
gotten, and  the  effect  produced  on  the  ordinary 
mind  was  m.ore  ludicrous  than  devotional.  When 
the  seven  daughters  of  Job  are  spoken  of  (as  they 
were  by  Gregory  the  Great)  as  typical  of  the  twelve 
Apostles,  because  the  number  seven  is  made  up  of 
the  addition  of  three  and  four,  and  three  multiplied 
by  four  makes  twelve,  we  seem  to  be  dealing  rather 
with  those  conundrums  used  as  the  pastime  of  in- 
genuity, than  with  suggestion  of  religious  or  even 
worthy  thought.  Far  short  of  such  absurdity  as 
this,  there  are  great  multitudes  of  more  or  less  fanci- 
ful resemblances  commonly  spoken  of  as  "  types  "  in 
which  there  is  no  real  connection  of  thought  or  pur- 
pose between  the   type   and   the   antitype.     Some 


208  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

minds  greatly  delight  in  these.  The  lintel  and  the 
side  posts  of  the  door  upon  which  the  passover 
blood  was  sprinkled,  are  suggestive  to  them  of  the 
form  of  the  cross  ;  the  red  color  of  the  thread  bound 
by  Rahab  in  the  window,  brings  to  their  minds  the 
blood  of  Christ ;  and  so  of  a  great  multitude  of 
other  details  in  the  story  of  old.  They  are  not  dis- 
turbed by  the  remote  nature  of  the  resemblance  in 
many  cases,  nor  by  the  palpable  evidence  of  a  dif- 
ferent object  in  others.  Thus,  in  the  two  cases  just 
cited,  it  is  plain  that  the  actual  form,  if  any,  deter- 
mined by  the  points  on  which  the  passover  blood 
was  sprinkled,  would  be  a  triangle  and  not  a  cross  ; 
and  the  object  of  the  red  color  of  Rahab's  thread  in 
her  window  was  evidently  to  make  it  conspicuous 
from  a  distance,  that  the  conquering  hosts  of  Israel 
might  the  more  readily  recognize  and  spare  her 
house.  Nevertheless,  the  tracing  out  and  dwelling 
upon  resemblances  of  this  kind,  has  been  in  all  ages 
and  still  continues  to  be  a  delight  to  many  devo- 
tional minds,  and  must  therefore  be  recognized  as 
one  of  the  ways  in  which  the  flame  of  devotion  may 
be  nourished.  Only  in  this,  as  in  other  matters,  it 
is  to  be  remembered  that  the  excessive  cultivation 
of  the  fancy  and  the  imagination  is  not  unattended 
with  danger.  As  continual  reading  of  fiction  nour- 
ishes a  tone  of  day-dreaming  and  unreality,  and 
tends  to  unfit  the  mind  for  the  sober  realities  of 
life ;  so  care  must  be  exercised  lest  too  much  dwell- 
ing upon  fanciful  resemblances  in  Scripture  confuse 
our  perception  of  those  which  were  divinely  in- 
tended, and  also  lead  us  to  seek  in  its  records,  like 


TYPOLOGY.  209 

the  Cabalists,  rather  fanciful  lessons  of  our  own 
devising  than  those  serious  facts  and  truths  which 
the  Holy  Spirit  designed  to  give  for  our  instruc- 
tion. 

This  may  be  enough  to  say  of  the  so-called  type 
looked  upon  in  its  lower  and  less  important  sense  of 
a  mere  resemblance.  It  is  plain  that  in  this  aspect 
it  cannot  be  reduced  to  laws,  but  is  simply  a  matter 
of  each  individual's  sense  of  fitness  and  congruity, 
and  can  be  restrained  only  by  good  sense  and  good 
taste  within  reasonable  bounds.  It  has  not  to  do 
with  the  real  meaning  of  Scripture,  but  only  with 
the  exercise  of  the  fancy  and  the  imagination  under 
the  guidance  of  a  devotional  spirit. 

Let  us  pass  on,  therefore,  to  the  higher  sense  of 
the  word  as  "  a  foreshadowing  example,"  that  is,  an 
example  in  the  Scripture  of  old  having  so  much  of 
the  nature  of  prophecy  that  it  foreshadows  some- 
thing corresponding  to  it  in  the  Gospel.  It  is  in 
this  sense  only  that  the  word  type  will  hereafter  be 
used.  One  point,  however,  needs  to  be  observed  in 
advance.  An  example  of  old  foreshadowing  some- 
thing in  the  Gospel  did  not  necessarily  make  the 
thing  foreshadowed  known  to  the  men  to  whom  it 
was  given.  It  may  have  helped  to  prepare  them  for 
it,  without  their  being  conscious  of  what  they  were 
prepared  for  ;  and  we,  in  looking  back  over  both  the 
type  and  the  antitype,  may  be  able  to  see  a  connec- 
tion between  them  which  was  not  visible  to  those 
who  could  see  clearly  only  the  type. 

When  the  question  is  asked,  What  is  a  type,  and 
how  is  it  to  be  recognized  ?  the  answer  will  be  uni- 
14 


210  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

versally  accepted  that  it  consists  in  a  resemblance  by 
which  the  things  of  old  gave  indication  beforehand 
of  the  things  of  the  Gospel.  Xj^s  difficulty  of  the 
subject  lies  in  thedetermination  of  the  points  wherein 
that  resemblance  is  to  be  looked  for.  On  this  it  will 
b^  necessary  to  dwelTarsomeTength,  for  it  forms  the 
key  to  the  whole  matter.  The  two  fundamental 
canons  on  the  subject  are  concisely  and  well  set 
forth  by  Fairbairn  substantially  as  follows:*  (i) 
There  must  have  been  in  the  type  the  same  great 
elements  of  truth  as  in  the  antitype,  and  in  this 
unity  of  teaching  the  true  resemblance  between  them 
is  to  be  found;  (2)  In  the  older  Dispensation  this  truth 
must  have  been  exhibited  in  a  form  more  easily 
understood  by  the  men  of  the  time  to  whom  it  was 
given  than  the  antitype  would  have  been. 

The  former  of  these  canons  is  the  more  important, 
and  its  truth  is  easily  seen  on  considering  the  rela- 
tion between  the  Dispensations  and  the  definition 
of  a  type  as  a  "  foreshadowing  example."  The  ear- 
lier Dispensation  could  only  have  been  preparatory 
for  the  later  by  means  of  the  truths  it  taught,  or  at 
least  by  its  forms  in  connection  with  these  truths. 
The  mere  forms  alone,  apart  from  the  truths  con- 
veyed by  them,  could  not  have  been  "foreshadowing 
examples,"  partly  because  there  is  sometimes  no 
answering  form  in  the  antitype,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
smitten  rock  in  the  wilderness ;  and  partly  because 
when  there  is,  as  in  the  case  of  a  king,  the  consider- 
ation of  the  mere   form,  apart   from  the  truth  in- 

*  Fairbairn,  Typology  of  Saipture,  Chap,  ii.,  II.,  Vol.  I.,  p.  50. 
Amer.  Ed.  1867, 


TYPOLOGY.  211 

volved,  has  been  so  far  from  preparing  men's  minds 
for  the  antitype,  that  it  has  rather  filled  them  with 
a  false  expectation  of  an  exact  repetition  of  the  old 
form  on  a  grander  scale.  It  is  clear,  then,  that  the 
essential  resemblance  between  the  type  and  the  anti- 
type must  be  in  the  truth  conveyed.  This  is  the 
ground  of  the  connection  between  them,  and  it  is  by 
this  that  we  distinguish  the  true  from  the  false  type. 
That  which  conveyed  to  minds  under  the  earlier 
Dispensation  the  same  truth  which  was  afterwards 
to  be  more  fully  revealed,  helped  to  prepare  them 
for  the  latter  and  became  a  "  foreshadowing  exam- 
ple," or  a  true  type.  Often,  but  not  always,  the 
recognition  of  the  connection  was  helped  by  the 
resemblance  in  the  outward  forms  in  which  the 
truth  was  embodied ;  but  a  mere  resemblance  in 
form,  without  any  connection  in  teaching,  is  no 
type.  To  illustrate :  the  brazen  serpent  was  a  type 
of  Christ,  and  was  used  by  Himself  in  His  conversa- 
tion with  Nicodemus  as  "a  foreshadowing  example" 
of  His  death  for  the  salvation  of  men.  "^  Wherein 
was  it  a  type?  It  is  not  infrequently  spoken  of  as 
if  it  consisted  in  the  form  of  a  cross  on  which  the 
brazen  serpent  was  suspended ;  but  this  is  puerile, 
and  where  is  the  evidence  that  there  was  any  cross 
in  the  case  at  all?  The  serpent  may  have  been  "set 
up  "  on  a  stone,  or  placed  on  a  pointed  pole  (as 
the  language  in  the  narrative  seems  to  indicate),f  or 
in  the  crotch  of  a  forked  stick.  And  supposing — 
which  is  very  unlikely — that  there  was  a  cross,  what 
would  it  have  taught,  or  how  would  it  have  prepared 

*  John,  iii.  14,  15.  f  Num.  xxi.  8,  9. 


212  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS, 

the  Israelites  for  Christ  and  His  death?  As  soon, 
however,  as  we  look  at  the  truth  conveyed,  all  be- 
comes clear.  The  Israelites,  bitten  by  serpents, 
were  in  danger  of  death ;  God  commanded  a  means  of 
safety  which  had  no  apparent  natural  efficacy  to  the 
end  proposed.  The  brazen  serpent  was  set  up,  and 
whoever  trusted  in  God's  word  and  used  His  ap- 
pointed means  by  looking  at  it  was  saved.  So  our 
Lord  told  Nicodemus  that  He  "  should  be  lifted 
up,"  that  whosoever  trusted  in  Him  should  not 
perish,  but  should  have  eternal  life.  The  outward 
resemblance  expressed  in  the  words  "lifted  up" 
was  a  help  to  the  perception  of  the  underlying 
truth,  but  did  not  in  itself  constitute  the  type.  The 
Israelites  were  here  taught  in  an  elementary  way 
and  in  a  particular  concrete  instance,  suited  to  their 
understanding,  the  same  truth  afterwards  to  be 
taught  by  the  sacrifice  of  Christ.  They  were  not 
told  of  that  sacrifice  by  the  brazen  serpent  ;  but 
their  minds  were  in  some  degree  prepared  for  it  by 
the  lesson  they  then  received. 

The  type  and  the  antitype  thus  stand  in  an  inti- 
mate mutual  relation  to  one  another.  It  may  often 
happen  that  we  gain  a  better  understanding  of  the 
antitypes  from  the  consideration  of  the  foreshadow- 
ing types  ;  for  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament 
constantly  assume  a  knowledge  of  these  on  the  part 
of  those  whom  they  addressed.  This  is  pre-emi- 
nently the  case  in  regard  to  the  great  types  of  the 
sacrifices  and  the  priesthood.  Much  of  the  New 
Testament  language  would  be  very  obscure  without 
a  knowledge  of  these,  as  they  were  ordained  in  the 


TYPOLOGY.  213 

Jewish  polity.  On  the  other  hand,  the  types  would 
often  be  still  more  obscure,  and  their  full  purpose 
misunderstood,  without  the  light  thrown  back  upon 
them  by  the  antitype.  There  must  have  been  in 
them  a  primary  and  direct  teaching  to  the  men  of 
the  age  in  which  they  were  given,  or  else  they 
would  have  been  of  no  use  or  value  at  all ;  and  that 
teaching  necessarily  lay  more  upon  the  surface ; 
while  to  us,  on  the  contrary,  the  typical  teaching 
has  become  of  more  importance. 

It  follows  from  these  things  that  the  resemblance 
between  the  type  and  the  antitype  must  have  been 
designed  ;  for  the  object  of  the  one  was  to  prepare 
the  way  for  the  other,  not  by  mere  outward  re- 
semblance, but  by  teaching  the  same  fundamental 
truth. 

If,  by  the  consequences  of  Adam's  sin  visited  upon 
all  his  posterity,  God  taught  that  the  members  of 
our  race  are  all  effected  by  the  acts  of  their  federal 
head,  Adam  therein  becomes  a  type  of  Christ ;  be- 
cause the  same  truth  in  a  higher  and  fuller  and 
better  development  is  still  involved  in  the  relation 
of  the  Christian  to  his  Master.  This  truth,  of  the 
existence  of  a  federal  as  well  as  an  individual  re- 
lation of  man,  is  indeed  everywhere  in  nature  and 
in  history,  and  thus,  in  a  certain  sense,  every  one 
who  stands  in  a  federal  relation  to  others  may  be 
spoken  of  as  a  type ;  but  as  no  other  man  can  ever 
possibly  represent  that  relation  so  strongly  as  the 
one  from  whom  we  are  all  descended,  so  no  other 
can,  in  this  respect,  be  so  strong  and  clear  a  type 
of  Christ.     But  Adam  does  not  hereby  necessarily 


214  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

become  a  type  of  our  Lord  in  other  respects.  He  is 
a  type  just  in  so  far  as  the  same  elements  of  truth 
appear  in  his  history  as  reappear  still  more  clearly 
in  that  of  Christ.  To  refer  to  one  more  illustration 
much  inferior  in  its  typical  character, but  which  was 
yet  a  favorite  with  many  of  the  early  Christian 
writers.  They  speak  of  Eve  as  a  type  of  the  church, 
because  she  was  formed  from  Adam,  even  as  the 
church  is  derived  from  Christ.  Here  it  cannot  be 
denied  that  there  is  a  real  type,  because  the  same 
truth  of  a  derived  and  dependent  life  appears  in 
either  case ;  and  yet  every  one  must  feel  that  the 
type  is  of  a  lower  kind,  because  the  life  in  the  case 
of  Eve  was  merely  the  physical,  animal  life,  while 
the  church  draws  from  Christ  its  highest  spiritual 
life.  That  which  is.  of  most  importance  in  the  anti- 
type is  altogether  wanting  in  the  type.  Such  an  in- 
stance, therefore,  while  it  cannot  be  altogether 
denied  the  character  of  a  type,  yet  jars  upon  our 
sense  of  congruity  and  fitness  almost  as  the  "  ambig- 
uous middle"  in  logic  jars  upon  the  reason.  The 
frequent  use  of  such  very  imperfect  types  has  a  ten- 
dency to  confuse  our  appreciation  of  Scripture  teach- 
ing. The  very  prominence  of  the  superficial  resem- 
blance is  in  danger  of  concealing  the  want  of  corre- 
spondence in  the  deeper  and  more  essential  truth. 

It  will  at  once  be  seen  that  the  application  of  this 
canon  cuts  up  by  the  roots  a  vast  mass  of  fanciful 
types.  They  may  remain  types  in  that  looser  mean- 
ing of  the  word,  which  consists  of  a  mere  reminder 
founded  upon  some  outward  resemblance  ;  but  they 
can  be  no  longer  considered  types  in  the  sense  of 


TYPOLOGY.  215 

"  foreshadowing  examples ;  "  because  they  do  not 
contain  the  same  elements  of  truth  as  the  antitype. 
David's  guilty  murder  of  Uriah  may  be  spoken  of  as 
a  type  of  the  Christian's  putting  his  sins  to  death ; 
but  it  is  plain  that  there  is  no  real  connection  be- 
tween them.  To  use  such  a  type  one  must  shut  his 
eyes  to  the  real  meaning  of  Scripture  and  the  lessons 
it  was  given  to  teach,  and  occupy  his  attention  with 
its  mere  words.  Yet  while  this  is  an  extreme  in- 
stance, there  are  many  others,  less  repulsive  perhaps, 
but  equally  devoid  of  any  true  and  living  connection 
between  the  alleged  type  and  the  antitype. 

The  second  canon  in  regard  to  types,  laid  down 
above,  that  ''  in  the  Old  Testament  the  truths  must 
have  been  exhibited  in  a  form  more  level  to  the 
comprehension,  more  easily  and  distinctly  cogniza- 
ble by  the  minds  of  men,"  is  also  necessarily  involved 
in  the  nature  of  the  case,  and  is  included  in  what  has 
already  been  said.  The  preparatory  would  be  of  no 
use,  there  would  be  no  occasion  for  its  being  given 
at  all,  unless  it  were  more  easily  apprehended  than 
that  for  which  it  is  designed  to  prepare  the  way. 
The  progress  of  revelation  must  ever  be  on  an 
ascending  scale,  and  especially  the  great  transition 
from  the  Old  Dispensation  to  the  New  must  be 
marked  by  a  rise  in  the  fulness  and  completeness 
of  the  revelation  of  spiritual  truth.  Of  course,  it  is 
not  meant  by  this  canon  that  the  full  truth  shall  be 
made  more  clear  by  the  type  than  by  the  antitype ; 
for  this  would  be  the  very  reverse  of  the  fact.  But 
the  lesson  actually  taught  by  the  type  to  the  men 
of  the  time  must  have  been  clearer  to  their  minds 


2l6  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

than  the  full  truth  which  it  typifies  would  have  been 
to  them.  Thus  in  regard  to  the  flood  :  It  was  a  true 
type  of  baptism,  because  it  contains  a  resemblance 
teaching  the  same  fundamental  truth — the  destruc- 
tion or  death  of  sin,  and  the  salvation  of  God,  with 
its  blessings  bestowed  upon  a  new  life  ;  but  the  men 
of  the  old  world  could  not  have  read  these  truths  in 
the  simple  rite  of  baptism.  They  needed  to  be 
taught  by  such  a  tremendous  and  sensible  Divine 
interposition  as  the  deluge.  In  the  same  way  the 
passage  of  the  Red  Sea  is  called  a  baptism  unto 
Moses ;  *  that  is  to  say,  the  relation  into  which  the 
Israelites  thereby  entered  to  Moses  as  the  prophet 
of  God,  was  a  true  type  of  the  relation  into  which 
the  Christian  enters  by  baptism  to  Christ.  In  either 
case  there  is  a  complete  surrender  of  the  individual's 
life  and  safety  into  the  hand  of  his  divinely  ap- 
pointed leader,  and  a  giving  of  allegiance  to  him  in 
the  very  act  of  accepting  the  salvation  he  offers. 

In  these  instances  it  is  plain  that  there  may  be 
many  and  different  types  of  the  same  antitype. 
Truth  is  many  sided,  and  it  is  often  impossible  that 
it  should  be  fully  set  forth  in  all  its  varied  aspects 
in  any  one  type.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  also  true 
that  one  and  the  same  thing  under  the  Old  Dis- 
pensation may  be  typical  of  more  than  one  under 
the  New.  For  the  type  may  embody  within  itself 
more  than  a  single  truth,  and  each  part  of  it  will 
thus  have  its  corresponding  truth,  in  the  later  Revela- 
tion. Thus  to  take  an  illustration  from  the  sacri- 
fices :  Two  goats,  one  to  be  slain  and  the  other  to 

*  I  Cor.  X.  2. 


TYPOLOGY.  217 

be  sent  into  the  wilderness  were  necessary  on  the 
Day  of  Atonement,  because  it  was  impossible  that 
one  victim  could  set  forth  the  necessity  of  death  for 
the  forgiveness  of  sin  and  also  the  bearing  away  of 
sin  out  of  sight  and  knowledge.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  ordinary  whole  burnt  offering  both  typified  the 
first  of  these  truths,  the  necessity  of  the  shedding 
of  blood  for  the  forgiveness  of  sin,  and  also  that 
of  entire  consecration  to  God's  service. 

It  seems  hardly  necessary  to  say  that  in  view  of 
these  principles  nothing  in  a  later  dispensation  can 
be  considered  as  typical  of  anything  in  an  earlier, 
and  nothing  which  teaches  a  truth  plainly  can  be 
looked  upon  as  typical  of  that  which  obscurely  sets 
forth  that  truth  in  a  figure.  Both  these  principles 
are  violated  by  such  interpretation  as  that  of  Words- 
worth which  makes  the  crystal  sea  in  heaven  typi- 
cal of  baptism  on  earth  *  This  is  a  violation  of  every 
principle  of  typology. 

It  is  easy  to  see  that  the  connection  between  the 
type  and  the  antitype  must  be  where  it  has  been 
placed,  in  the  truth  conveyed  rather  than  in  the 
mere  outward  resemblance  between  the  objects  set 
before  the  mind,  for  both  a  negative  and  a  positive 
reason.  Negatively,  a  partial  and  incomplete  repre- 
sentation of  an  object  would  necessarily  have  tended 
to  preoccupy  the  mind  with  the  representation  itself, 
and  thus  to  unfit  it  for  the  representation  of  the 
reality.  The  preparatory  would  have  been  more 
difficult  to  understand  in  its  essential  meaning  than 
the  complete  ;  just  as  an  outline  sketch  is  more  dif- 

*  Wordsworth,  Lect.  on  the  Apocalypse.     Lect.  IV.  p.  loi. 


2l8  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

ficult  to  understand  than  a  full  picture.  Even  as  it 
is,  this  difficulty  has  always  attended  the  use  of 
types.  As  a  matter  of  history,  the  carnally  minded 
Jews  went  astray  from  this  very  cause.  They  recog- 
nized the  preparatory  and  typical  character  of  their 
Dispensation  and  looked  forward  to  the  Messiah; 
but  they  looked  to  objects  and  not  to  truths.  Espe- 
cially in  regard  to  the  ritual  types  :  they  looked  for 
the  perpetuity  of  the  temple  and  its  sacrifices  and 
the  universal  establishment  of  the  whole  Mosaic  law. 
Consequently  when  these  types  were  fulfilled  in  the 
revelation  of  the  truths  which  they  were  designed 
to  set  forth,  they  were  strongly  disposed  to  cling 
still  to  the  shadow  as  necessary  to  the  substance. 
It  was  only  with  difficulty,  after  much  discussion, 
and  when  the  Divine  will  had  been  very  clearly  made 
known  that  the  believing  Jews,  of  whom  the  Chris- 
tian Church  was  at  first  exclusively  composed,  could 
be  induced  to  admit  the  uncircumcised  believers* 
to  their  fellowship  on  equal  terms.  This  mistaken 
looking  to  the  outward  object,  instead  of  to  the 
essential  truth  contained  in  the  type,  was  one  of 
the  great  stumbling-blocks  in  the  way  of  the  re- 
ception of  the  Gospel  by  the  Jews.  It  has  been 
the  same  thing  under  Christianity.  Among  the  un- 
cultured especially,  the  sensible  images  by  which 
the  Scriptures  have  sought  to  set  before  the  mind  the 
truths  of  the  future  world  have  too  often  been  taken 
literally  as  the  actual  description  of  objects,  and  so 
have  led  to  expectations  of  the  future  altogether 
false  and  unworthy.     The  errors  of  the  Chiliasts  rest 

*  See  Acts,  xv.  etc. 


TYPOLOGY.  219 

Upon  the  same  misapprehension.  They  sought  the 
meaning  of  the  type  in  the  mere  outward  object  in- 
stead of  in  the  underlying  truth,  and  so  interpreted 
spiritual  things  sensuously.  It  is  a  general  tendency 
of  the  human  mind  always  leading  to  more  or  less 
serious  error. 

The  positive  reason  for  the  statement  that  the  con- 
nection between  the  type  and  the  antitype  is  in  the 
truth  conveyed  rather  than  in  any  merely  outward 
resemblance,  needs  but  to  be  stated.  It  is  at  once 
seen  from  this  point  of  view  how  the  mind,  by  the 
imperfect  teaching  of  the  type,  was  led  up  towards 
the  truth  of  the  Gospel  and  prepared  for  its  recep- 
tion, when  it  should  be  revealed  in  the  fulness  of 
time.  Types  thus  fall  into  their  place  in  harmony 
with  all  other  parts  of  the  preparatory  Dispensation, 
and  become  one  of  the  many  ways  in  which  "  the 
law  was  our  schoolmaster  to  bring  us  to  Christ." 

Having  thus  far  spoken  of  the  general  principles 
of  typology,  I  propose  to  examine  these  in  their 
application  to  various  classes  of  types  ;  for  the  types, 
like  the  prophecies  of  whose  nature  they  partake, 
may  be  arranged  in  several  kinds  or  classes.  The 
examination  of  these  different  classes  separately  wall 
conclude  this  discussion  of  typology. 


LECTURE   X. 

TYPOLOGY— Continued. 

II.  Special  Classes  of  Types, 

In  the  last  lecture  the  general  principles  of  typol- 
ogy were  considered ;  we  have  now  to  examine  the 
application  of  those  principles  to  particular  classes 
of  types.  It  is  not  necessary  to  make  an  exhaustive 
classification  of  these  ;  but  only  to  take  up  the  more 
prominent  and  important  kinds  as  sufficient  exam- 
ples of  all. 

I. 

I  begin  with  Ritual  or  Legal  Types  ;  in  other 
words,  with  the  symbolical  institutions  of  the  Mosaic 
Dispensation. 

It  is  to  be  remembered  that  the  typical  character 
of  these,  however  important  in  itself,  and  however 
it  may  have  been  the  reason  for  their  existence,  is 
yet  in  a  certain  sense  secondary.  If  they  are  pro- 
phetic symbols,  they  must  have  been  first  of  all 
symbols ;  they  must  have  been  outward,  sensible 
representations  of  divine  truth  in  connection  with 
an  existing  dispensation.  They  must  have  had  a 
primary  value  to  the  men  of  the  time  when  they 
were  given.  While  looking  back  upon  them  in  the 
light   of  the   antitype  we  are  apt  to  overlook  too 


T  YPOLOG  Y— CONTINUED.  22 1 

much  their  significance  in  the  time  to  which  they 
belonged  and  to  dwell  too  exclusively  on  their  con- 
nection with  the  future.  The  first  point,  therefore, 
is  to  enquire  what  they  were  designed  to  teach  the 
men  of  old.  If  we  do  not  find  that  they  taught 
anything  to  them  in  the  same  line  of  truth,  so  to 
speak,  as  that  with  which  we  are  disposed  to  con- 
nect them,  then  their  typical  significance  in  this 
respect  fails.  For  example,  during  the  first  great 
battle  of  the  Israelites  with  Amalek  in  the  wilder- 
ness when  Moses  held  up  his  hands  in  the  attitude 
of  prayer,  Israel  prevailed  ;  when  he  let  them  fall, 
their  enemies  were  too  strong  for  them.*  This  may 
truly  be  called  an  example,  or  if  you  please,  a  type 
of  the  value  and  efficacy  of  intercessory  prayer ;  but 
when  it  is  cited  as  a  type  of  the  cross,  because 
Moses  with  his  outstretched  arms  exhibited  the 
form  of  the  cross,  the  supposed  typical  significance 
altogether  fails,  since  there  was  nothing  to  suggest 
to  those  who  saw  it  the  teaching  of  the  cross  or  to 
prepare  them  for  the  reception  of  its  especial  doc- 
trine. 

To  bring  what  has  been  said  to  bear  directly  upon 
that  class  of  types  contained  in  the  symbolical  insti- 
tutions of  the  Mosaic  legislation,  let  us  look  first  at 
their  great  central  type,  the  sacrifices.  Each  of 
these  had  its  special  typical  significance.  They  have 
already  been  treated  so  much  at  length  that  it  is  not 
necessary  to  enlarge  upon  them.  Let  us  select  then 
the  sin  offering,  in  several  respects  the  most  impor- 
tant and  the  most  significant  of  them  all.     Was  this 

*  Ex.  xvii.  II,  12. 


222  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

really  typical  of  the  sacrifice  of  Christ ;  in  other 
words,  did  it  set  forth  in  sensible  and  easily  un- 
derstood image  the  same  great  truths  afterwards  to 
be  more  clearly  and  fully  revealed  by  our  redemp- 
tion upon  the  cross?  Setting  aside  minor  matters, 
three  points  are  obvious :  first,  the  recognition  of 
sin.  We  see  in  the  Psalms  and  in  the  Prophets  the 
effect  of  this  teaching,  in  strong  contrast  with  the 
literature  of  most  other  nations,  in  the  recognition  of 
sin  in  its  true  character.  Where  else  can  be  found 
that  cry  of  the  penitent,  "  Wash  me  thoroughly 
from  mine  iniquity,  and  cleanse  me  from  my  sin. 
For  I  acknowledge  my  transgressions,  and  my  sin  is 
ever  before  me.  Against  thee,  thee  only,  have  I 
sinned  and  done  this  evil  in  thy  sight."  *  Surely 
in  the  sin  offering  the  type  and  the  antitype  are 
bound  together  in  the  truth  conveyed,  and  the 
former  becomes  a  most  important  preparation  for 
the  latter. 

The  second  truth  conveyed  by  the  sin  offering 
was  that  of  the  surrender  of  life  in  consequence  of 
transgression.  The  typical  significance  of  this  is 
plain.  God's  love  for  the  sinner  and  His  righteous 
wrath  against  sin  were  both  alike  to  be  taught. 
Simple  and  unconditioned  forgiveness  might  have 
expressed  the  one,  but  would  have  given  no  mani- 
festation of  the  other.  The  abhorrence  of  sin  must 
be  shown  at  the  same  time  with  the  forgiveness  of 
the  sinner.  By  the  shedding  of  blood  as  the  condi- 
tion of  the  atonement  this  was  made  as  clear  as  was 
possible  in   a  type,  and  thus  man  was  prepared  for 

*  Ps.  li.  2-4. 


TYPOLOGY— CONTINUED.  223 

the  vindication  of  God's  righteousness  in  the  death 
of  His  Son  upon  the  cross,  that  thereby  we  might 
be  reconciled  to  Him  and  our  trespasses  be  forgiven. 
Yet  it  was  far  from  teaching  that  Christ's  sufferings 
were  a  compensation  for  our  sins,  an  equivalent 
rendered  to  God  for  our  misdoing  ;  on  the  contrary, 
His  atonement  appears  as  the  vindication  of  the 
righteousness  of  God,  manifested  to  the  whole  uni- 
verse, while  at  the  same  time  in  his  infinite  love  He 
extends  free  forgiveness  to  all  that  trust  in  Him. 

The  third  great  truth  taught  by  the  sin  offering 
is  already  involved  in  what  has  been  said — God's 
acceptance  of  a  vicarious  substitute.  To  this  men 
made  small  objection  as  long  as  the  teaching  of  the 
Old  Testament  was  fresh  in  their  minds ;  but  in  our 
own  day,  when  men  have  drifted  away  from  this, 
such  vicarious  substitution  has  become  to  them  one 
of  the  stumbling-blocks  and  offences  of  the  Gospel. 
I  do  not  know  that  other  evidence  is  needed,  both 
of  the  typical  and  preparatory  character  of  this 
Mosaic  institution,  and  at  the  same  time  of  the  im- 
portance to  us,  even  in  the  full  noonday  light  of 
the  Gospel,  of  keeping  alive  and  fresh  this  prepara- 
tory teaching  of  the  dim  ages  of  antiquity. 

There  are  many  other  typical  elements  in  the  sin 
offering,  but  these  are  subsidiary  ;  the  great  outlines 
of  its  teaching  have  been  here  recapitulated.  They 
remain  forever  true,  though  the  type  in  which  they 
were  once  embodied  has  passed  away,  to  be  repeated 
no  more. 

In  the  same  way  all  the  other  institutions  of  the 
Mosaic  legislation  might  be  treated  at  length,  and 


224  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

it  would  be  seen  that  in  all  of  them  the  typical 
value  consists  in  the  truth  conveyed  rather  than 
in  their  outward  resemblance  to  the  antitype. 
Thus  the  great  lesson  of  the  priesthood  was  the 
necessity  of  an  authorized  mediator  to  stand  be- 
tween man  and  God.  ''  No  man  taketh  this  honor 
unto  himself,  but  he  that  was  called  of  God  as  was 
Aaron."  *  Thus  were  the  minds  of  men  prepared 
for  the  coming  of  the  true  Mediator,  with  the  per- 
fect authority  of  the  Son  of  God  Himself,  Who  by 
His  greater  and  more  perfect  sacrifice,  offered  once 
for  all,  "  hath  perfected  forever  them  that  are  sanc- 
tified." And  the  same  teaching  is  still  needed  for 
us  to  show  that  the  object  and  work  of  the  priest- 
hood having  been  fully  and  finally  accomplished, 
and  ''  eternal  redemption  "  having  been  obtained  for 
us,  there  can  be  forever  no  priest  for  us,  other  than 
He  who  has  gone  "  into  heaven  itself,  now  to  appear 
in  the  presence  of  God  for  us,"  f  where  "  He  is  able 
also  to  save  them  to  the  uttermost  that  come  unto 
God  by  Him,  seeing  He  ever  liveth  to  make  inter- 
cession for  them."  :j: 

These  may  serve  as  sufficient  examples.  All 
other  typical  institutions  may  be  examined  in  the 
same  way,  and  the  conclusion  will  be  reached  in 
all  that  what  constitutes  the  type,  what  formed 
the  ground  of  the  connection  between  the  type 
and  the  antitype,  so  that  the  one  prepared  the 
way  for  the  other,  was  the  truth  which  it  taught. 

*  Heb,  V.  4.  f  lb,  ix.  24.  %  lb.  vii.  25. 


T  YFOLOG  Y— CONTINUED.  225 

11. 

The  next  general  class  of  types  is  the  historical. 
Two  considerations  suggest  beforehand  that  such 
types  will  be  found  in  Scripture  :  First,  since  the 
Old  Testament  as  a  whole  was  preparatory  for  the 
New,  and  both  were  parts  of  one  general  Divine 
plan,  we  should  expect  that  its  history  would  be  so 
ordered,  and  the  inspired  record  of  that  history 
would  be  so  written,  as  to  bring  out,  in  their  ele- 
ments at  least,  truths  which  were  afterwards  to  be 
fully  revealed  in  the  Gospel.  Secondly^  since  this 
purpose  is  plainly  impressed  upon  the  institutions  of 
the  Mosaic  economy,  we  should  expect  the  history 
to  be  in  harmony  with  them  and  to  concur  in  the 
same  general  design.  In  the  nature  of  the  case  the 
connection  between  type  and  antitype  must  be 
somewhat  less  close  in  history  than  in  expressly  es- 
tablished religious  symbols.  The  latter  are  more 
exclusively  Divine ;  the  former  are  more  affected  by 
the  play  of  human  action.  Still,  both  are  under  the 
Divine  control,  and  if  the  relation  of  the  type  to  the 
antitype  is  less  close,  it  is  nevertheless  the  same  in 
kind. 

The  actual  existence  of  such  types  is  shown  by 
three  considerations  :  (i)  There  are  many  narratives 
of  the  Old  Testament  typically  interpreted  in  the 
New,  and  in  these  examples  we  may  observe  the 
same  sort  of  resemblance  and  limits  of  resemblance 
as  have  already  been  found  in  the  symbolical  institu- 
tions. (2)  Numerous  and  varied  historical  types  in 
the  earlier  dispensation  were  highly  important  to 
15 


226  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

the  accomplishment  of  its  great  object,  the  prepara- 
tion of  mankind  for  the  Gospel.  The  symbolical 
and  directly  religious  institutions  met  the  needs  of 
the  people  on  one  side ;  but  there  would  have  been 
a  great  defect  in  their  training  if  they  had  not 
found  the  same  lessons  impressed  upon  their 
minds  by  their  history,  which  they  were  so  often 
exhorted  to  recall  and  to  teach  to  their  children 
and  their  children's  children.  (3)  The  Old  Testa- 
ment itself  gives  clear  indications  that  much  of 
its  history  was  so  related  to  a  higher  future 
ideal  as  to  stand  to  that  ideal  in  the  relation  of  a 
type. 

A  short  development  of  each  of  these  points  will 
be  all  that  is  necessary  to  be  said  on  the  subject  of 
the  historical  types. 

(i)  Some  of  the  principal  narratives  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament typically  treated  in  the  New  are  the  story  of 
Adam  and  Eve,  of  Cain  and  Abel,  of  the  Flood,  of 
Melchisedec,  of  Abraham,  Sarah  and  Hagar,  Isaac  and 
Ishmael,  of  Moses,  of  the  Exodus  from  Egypt,  the 
Passover,  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea,  the  giving  of 
the  manna,  the  water  from  the  rock,  the  brazen  ser- 
pent, and  other  things  in  the  wilderness,  of  David, 
Solomon,  and  the  prophet  Jonah.  Some  of  these 
have  already  been  mentioned  in  the  general  discussion 
of  the  subject ;  but  it  is  as  true  of  the  historical  type 
as  of  the  typical  institution,  that  it  may  foreshadow 
more  than  one  truth  according  as  it  is  looked  at 
from  different  points  of  view.  Thus  the  story  of 
Adam  and  Eve  is  used  by  our  Lord  to  show  that 
monogamy  was  God's  original  design  for  man  and 


TYPOLOGY— CONTINUED.  22/ 

that  divorce  is  generally  unlawful.  ^  By  St.  Paul  it 
is  used  in  a  variety  of  ways  :  to  the  Corinthians  he 
speaks  of  it  as  setting  forth  the  proper  relation  be- 
tween man  and  woman,  \  and  again,  in  another 
aspect,  to  Timothy  as  setting  forth  the  same  rela- 
tion. X  Of  Adam  alone  he  also  speaks  at  length  to 
the  Romans  as  a  type  of  Christ  in  his  federal  head- 
ship of  the  human  race,  §  and  again,  to  the  Corinthi- 
ans in  his  great  chapter  on  the  resurrection  ;  ||  in  the 
same  passage  also  he  makes  Adam,  in  contrast  with 
Christ,  a  type  of  the  natural  and  earthly  body  as 
contrasted  with  the  spiritual  and  heavenly.  \  All 
these  different  truths  were  set  forth  by  this  same 
story,  and  therefore  in  all  these  respects  it  was  truly 
typical  of  the  things  to  come.  Alike  many-sided 
was  the  teaching  of  the  flood.  Mention  has  already 
been  made  of  the  passage  in  which  St.  Peter  refers 
to  it  as  a  type  of  baptism  ;*^  but  it  is  also  used  by 
our  Lord  as  a  type  of  the  end  of  the  world  in  that, 
in  the  one  case  as  in  the  other,  the  Divine  warning 
of  the  coming  calamity  is  neglected,  and  men  con- 
tinue in  their  accustomed  ways  until  the  sudden  de- 
struction bursts  upon  them  ;  ff  again,  in  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews,  Noah  is  referred  to  as  an  example 
or  type  of  faith,  showing  forth  in  his  conduct  the 
true  nature  of  faith  in  all  ages  ;  :j::l:  once  more,  St. 
Peter  makes  the  deliverance  of  Noah  teach  the  gen- 
eral truth  of  God's  delivering  the  righteous  and  over- 

*  Matt.  xix.  4-6;  Mark,  x.  6-9,  cf.  I  Cor.  vi.  16. 
f  I  Cor.  xi.  8.  t  I  Tim   ii.  11-14.      §  Rom.  v.  12-19. 

\  I  Cor.  XV.  21,  22.      TF  lb.  ver.  44-46.         **  i  Pet.  iii.  20,  21. 
ff  Matt.xxiv.  37-39;  Luke  xvii.  26,  27.      %%  Heb.  xi.  7. 


228  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

throwing  the  ungodly  ;  "^  and  finally,  in  a  very  im- 
portant passage, f  he  sets  forth  the  flood  as  a  type 
of  the  final  destruction  of  the  world.  In  this  last 
instance  the  type  is  of  especial  value  to  us  as  show- 
ing the  nature  of  that  final  destruction  ;  for  the 
Apostle  says  that  the  world  shall  be  destroyed  by 
fire  as  it  has  already  been  by  the  flood, — that  is  the 
world  as  inhabited  by  man,  and  there  shall  be  new 
heavens  and  earth  in  the  one  case  as  in  the  other, 
thus  showing  that  nothing  is  affirmed  as  to  the  con- 
tinued existence  of  this  terraqueous  globe. 

It  were  too  long  thus  to  dwell  in  detail  upon  all 
the  Old  Testament  narratives  typically  treated  in 
the  New.  Several  others  are  brought  out  in  differ- 
ent relations  as  different  truths  were  contained  in 
the  lessons  of  the  same  story.  Others  are  mentioned 
but  once,  or  if  more  than  once,  only  in  connection 
with  the  same  truth.  Thus  Rahab  is  spoken  of  both 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  :j:  and  in  that  of  St. 
James.  §  Both  writers  treat  of  the  same  typical 
act ;  but  one  as  teaching  "'  a  working  faith,"  the 
other  "a  faith  working."  It  is  plain  that  the  New 
Testament  writers  take  up  and  treat  the  histories  of 
old  embodying  the  lessons  they  were  at  the  moment 
engaged  in  enforcing;  and  had  they  been  treating 
of  other  subjects,  they  would  have  referred  to  other 
stories  which  enforced  such  other  truths  as  they 
wished  to  teach.  The  types  of  the  Old  Testament 
are  not  therefore  exhausted  by  the  treatment  of  the 
New.     Rather  these  are  but  examples  showing  us 

*  2  Pet.  ii.  5.  t  lb.  iii.  5-7- 

X  Heb.  xi.  31.  §  James,  ii.  25 


TYPOLOGY— CONTINUED.  229 

how  to  make  use  of  types,  viz. :  by  developing  the 
lessons  of  truth  taught  through  them  to  the  men  of 
their  time,  and  bringing  these  to  bear  upon  the  fuller 
revelation  of  the  Gospel.  There  are  even  instances 
of  types,  declared  to  be  such  in  the  Old  Testament, 
which  are  not  mentioned  in  the  New.  That  in 
which  a  truth  was  taught  of  old,  whatever  it  be,  is 
a  type  of  that  wherein  the  same  has  been  taught 
also  "  in  these  last  days." 

There  are  two  points  in  which  these  historical 
types  generally  may  seem  defective:  ia)  The  out- 
ward resemblance  may  sometimes  be  faint,  as  in  the 
case  of  Ishmael,  the  son  of  the  slave,  a  type  of  the 
Jew,  and  of  Isaac,  the  son  of  promise,  a  type  of  the 
Christian;"^  or  the  external  resemblance  may  even 
at  first  sight  seem  to  be  inverted,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  destructive  waters  of  the  flood  typifying  the 
saving  waters  of  baptism,  f  This  belongs  to  the 
nature  of  symbolical  representation  of  truth.  Our 
Lord  himself,  in  a  parable,  likens  God  to  an  unjust 
judge ;  X  and  St.  Paul  uses  the  simile  of  grafting  the 
wild  olive  upon  the  good  tree.§  Such  instances  are 
not  infrequent  because  the  object  is  to  set  forth 
some  truth  which  is  found  in  the  main  point  of  the 
parable,  or  figure,  or  type.  The  accessories,  the 
likeness  or  unlikeness  in  minor  points,  is  unimport- 
ant and  is  passed  by.  Perhaps  the  fact  may  be  best 
illustrated  by  a  false  type,  such  as  representing 
Abel,  a  feeder  of  flocks,  as  herein  a  type  of  the 
Good  Shepherd.    In  this  there  is  a  sufficiently  close 

*Gal.  iv.  22-31.  f  I  Pet.  in.  21. 

X  Rom.  xi.  16-24.  ^  §  Luke,  xviii.  1-8. 


230  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

external  resemblance,  but  the  one  throws  no  light 
upon  the  other;  there  is  no  great  common  truth 
taught,  and  the  earlier  in  no  way  prepares  the  mind 
for  the  latter.  Certainly  there  are  other  ways  in 
which  Abel  may  in  some  degree  prefigure  Christ,  as 
in  his  faithfulness,  his  innocent  death  at  the  hands 
of  the  guilty,  etc. ;  but,  simply  as  a  shepherd,  he  is 
only  a  type  in  the  same  way  as  every  other  shep- 
herd ;  there  is  nothing  peculiar  to  Abel.  Types  of 
this  kind  are  never  used  in  the  New  Testament. 
What  is  there  sought  is  not  external  resemblance, 
but  identity  of  moral  truth. 

{b)  The  other  defect  in  the  historical  types  to 
which  I  referred,  is  a  want  of  correspondence  in  the 
proportion  between  the  truth  set  forth  by  the  type 
in  the  system  to  which  it  belongs,  and  the  propor- 
tion between  the  truth  in  the  antitype  and  its  sys- 
tem. Generally  speaking,  this  must  be  the  case, 
and  necessarily  results  from  the  fact  that  an  imper- 
fect system  of  truth  cannot  be  proportioned  In  the 
same  way  as  a  more  perfect  one.  Thus  Joshua,  In 
the  strength  of  the  Lord,  leading  the  people  to  the 
conquest  of  Canaan,  is  a  type  of  Christ  leading 
those  who  trust  in  Him  to  the  victory  over  their 
spiritual  enemies;  but  in  the  one  case,  the  conquest 
itself  is  the  promlne'n^  feature,  in  the  other,  this  Is 
secondary,  and-is-ct  consequence  of  the  union  of  the 
believer  with  Christ.  This  difference  of  proportion 
Is  necessary  In  all  forms  of  preparatory  teaching. 
Even  in  direct  and  explicit  commands,  the  precept, 
''  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself,"  *  belongs" 

*Lev.  xix.  18;  Matt.  v.  44;  xix.  19;  xxii. '39,  and  parallels; 
Rom.  xiii.  9  ;  Gal,  v.  14  ;  James,  ii.  8. 


T  YPOLOG  Y— CONTINUED.  2  3 1 

both  to  Leviticus  and  to  the  Gospel ;  but  in  the  one 
it  was  inconspicuous ;  in  the  other  it  has  become 
the  great  law  of  intercourse  between  man  and  man. 
In  types,  however,  this  disproportion  is  especially- 
marked.  Man  needed  to  be  impressed  with  the 
majesty  and  terribleness  of  the  Almighty  by  the 
thunders  of  Sinai,  before  he  could  understand  the 
unutterable  love  of  the  Gospel.  So  great  was  the 
change,  that  the  New  Testament  puts  the  one  in 
contrast  with  the  other:  **Ye  are  not  come  unto 
the  Mount  that  might  be  touched"  ....  "but  ye 
are  come  unto  Mount  Zion."*  There  are,  indeed, 
a  few  of  the  most  important  both  of  the  prophecies 
and  of  the  types  of  old  which  correspond  in  their 
proportion,  simply  because  they  are  the  most  im- 
portant to  the  proportion  of  the  similar  things 
under  the  Gospel.  Thus  the  prophecy  of  Christ's 
first  coming  occupies  in  the  Old  Testament  a  simi- 
lar place  to  the  prophecy  of  His  second  coming  in 
the  New.  The  great  type  of  sacrifice  was  the  lead- 
ing feature  of  the  Mosaic  legislation,  just  as  the 
antitype,  the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  is  the  great  fact  of 
the  Gospel.  But  this  correspondence  of  proportion, 
for  the  reasons  just  given,  can  only  hold  in  regard 
to  those  matters  which  occupy  the  very  first  rank. 
In  regard  to  others,  the  type  and  the  truth  it 
teaches  cannot  occupy  the  same  proportionate  place 
in  the  elementary  and  in  the  perfected  system.  We 
cannot  set  truth  before  the  mind  of  the  child  in  the 
same  proportion  as  in  maturer  years;  the  elements 
of  truth  must  first  be  thoroughly  taught,  but  there 
*  Heb.  xii.  18,  22. 


232  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

comes  a  time  when,  as  we  are  exhorted,  "  leaving 
the  principles  [or  elements]  of  the  doctrine  of 
Christ,  let  us  go  on  unto  perfection."  * 

(2)  The  next  consideration  mentioned  as  showing 
the  existence  of  historical  types  was  the  importance 
of  them  to  the  accomplishment  of  their  great  object, 
the  preparation  of  mankind  for  the  Gospel.  This 
follows  from  the  position  of  the  Israelites  as  belong- 
ing to  a  preparatory  Dispensation.  Living,  as  they 
did,  in  the  midst  of  symbolical  institutions,  much  of 
their  life — in  other  words,  of  their  history — would 
naturally  have  taken  on  a  symbolical  character. 
There  must  have  been  a  harmony  between  them- 
selves and  the  dispensation  to  which  they  belonged, 
in  so  far  as  they  were  true  to  their  vocation  either 
consciously  or  by  the  overruling  hand  of  Him  who 
shaped  their  destiny.  Hence  there  would  have 
been  a  correspondence  between  their  history  and 
that  of  the  truths  taught  in  an  elementary  way  in 
their  religion,  and  this  is  the  same  thing  as  to  say 
that  their  history  was  typical. 

The  New  Testament  refers  to  many  instances  of 
such  typical  teaching  in  the  history  of  old.  Thus 
St.  Paul  writes,  ''  Moses  put  a  veil  over  his  face, 
that  the  children  of  Israel  could  not  steadfastly  look 
to  the  end  of  that  which  is  abolished.  But  their 
minds  were  blinded  :  for  until  this  day  the  same  veil 
remaineth  untaken  away  in  the  reading  of  the  Old 
Testament ;  but  even  unto  this  day,  when  Moses  is 
read,  the  veil  is  upon  their  heart ;  nevertheless,  when 
it  shall  turn  to  the  Lord,  the  veil  shall  be  taken 

*  Heb.  vi.  I. 


TYPOLOGY— CONTINUED.  233 

away."  *  This  is  not  a  mere  illustration  ;  it  is  a 
bringing  out  of  the  typical  force  and  meaning  of  an 
Old  Testament  transaction.  Moses  put  the  veil  over 
liis  face  when  he  came  down  from  his  prolonged  and 
close  intercourse  with  God  on  the  Mount,  because 
"  the  skin  of  his  face  shone,"  and  the  people  "  were 
afraid  to  come  nigh  him."  f  This  incident,  im- 
mediately and  directly,  showed  two  things  to  the 
people  :  first,  that  man  was  elevated  and  glorified  by 
close  communion  with  the  Almighty  ;  and  secondly, 
that  they  themselves  were  as  yet  unfitted  for  such 
communion.  Nevertheless,  they  had  both  the  Di- 
vine declaration  that  they  should  be  a  ''  kingdom  of 
priests  "  :|:  to  their  God,  and  the  primeval  promise 
that  the  head  of  the  serpent,  the  power  of  evil, 
should  be  bruised  by  the  woman's  seed.  §  Thus 
their  present  state  was  shown  to  be  abnormal,  and 
they  were  taught  that  there  must  be  some  way,  not 
yet  manifested,  by  which  man  could  be  brought 
near  to  God. 

At  an  earlier  date  Abraham  was  promised  a  child 
in  whose  posterity  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  should 
be  blessed.  After  remaining  childless  until  all  human 
possibility  of  the  fulfilment  of  the  promise  had  van- 
ished, he  took  to  himself  a  concubine  who  was  his 
slave,  and  a  son  was  born.  But  this  was  not  the 
child  of  promise,  and  when  at  last  he  also  was  given, 
hostility  naturally  arose  ;  the  child  of  the  flesh  perse- 
cuted the  child  of  promise,  and  was  cast  out  because 
he  was  not  intended  to  inherit  the  special  blessing  of 

*  2  Cor.  iii.  13-16.     '  f  Ex.  xxxiv.  29-35. 

X  Ex.  xix.  5.  §  Gen.  iii.  15. 


234  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

his  father.  Here  the  Israelites,  and  through  them  the 
world,  were  shown  that  heavenly  blessings  are  not 
tied  down  to  the  line  of  earthly  descent,  but  follow 
rather  that  of  the  divine  promise.  They  were  taught 
this  by  a  sensible  and  special  instance,  such  as  they 
could  understand  ;  but  John  the  Baptist  appreciated 
and  expressed  the  underlying  truth  when  he  taught, 
''  Think  not  to  say  within  yourselves,  We  have  Abra- 
ham to  our  father  ;  for  I  say  unto  you  that  God  is 
able  of  these  stones  to  raise  up  children  unto  Abra- 
ham." '^ 

It  may  sometimes  happen  that  a  fact  of  history 
has  no  prophetic  teaching  in  itself  at  the  time  it 
occurred,  and  therefore  was  not  originally  a  type,  yet 
afterwards  receives  such  significance  by  being  asso- 
ciated with  prophecies  of  the  future.  Thus  it  is 
hard  to  see  how  Jonah's  three  days'  entombment  in 
the  sea  monster  could  have  taught  his  contempora- 
ries anything  of  our  Lord's  three  days  in  the  grave ; 
but  when  the  Jews  asked  for  a  sign  and  *'  the  sign 
of  the  prophet  Jonas  "  was  given  to  them,  with  the 
declaration  **so  shall  the  Son  of  man  be  three  days 
and  three  nights  in  the  heart  of  the  earth,"  t  then, 
from  that  time,  and  in  consequence  of  that  declara- 
tion, Jonah  became  "  a  foreshadowing  example,"  a 
true  type.  Yet  in  some  other  respects,  as  a  prophet 
preaching  to  a  people  lost  in  sin  but  saved  in  listen- 
ing to  him  and  repenting,  he  was  always  a  type.  As 
our  Lord  states  it,  "As  Jonas  was  a  sign  unto  the 
Ninevites,  so  shall  the  Son  of  man  be  to  this  genera- 
tion." X 

*  Matt.  iii.  9.      f  lb.  xii.  40,  cf.  Jonah,  ii.  I.      :{:  Luke,  xi.  30. 


T  YFOLOG  Y— CON  TIN  UED,  235 

St.  Augustine  has  said,  "•  The  Old  Testament, 
when  rightly  understood,  is  one  great  prophecy  of 
the  New."  ^  And  this  is  explained  by  Fairbairn, 
"  Its  records  of  the  past  are  pregnant  with  the  germs 
of  a  corresponding,  but  more  exalted  future.  The 
relations  sustained  by  its  more  public  character,  the 
parts  they  were  appointed  to  act  in  their  day  and 
generation,  the  deliverances  that  were  wrought  for 
them  and  by  them,  and  the  chastisements  they  were 
from  time  to  time  given  to  experience,  did  not  begin 
and  terminate  with  themselves.  They  were  parts  of 
an  unfinished  and  progressive  plan,  which  finds  its 
destined  completion  in  the  person  and   kingdom  of 

Christ."  t 

(3)  The  third  consideration  mentioned  is  that  the 
Old  Testament  itself  often  indicates  the  typical  char- 
acter of  its  narratives.  Some  of  these  instances  are 
familiar.  Moses  told  the  people  assembled  in  the 
plains  of  Moab,  ''  The  Lord  thy  God  will  raise  up  a 
Prophet  from  the  midst  of  thee,  of  thy  brethren, 
like  unto  me."J  He  here  makes  himself  a  type,  but 
of  what  ?  First  of  a  series  of  prophets  who  should 
make  known  to  them  God's  will  ;  but  finally  also  of 
the  one  great  Prophet  who  alone  should  make  a  per- 
fect revelation.  Moses  therefore,  was  a  type,  first, 
of  the  human  prophets  in  succession  through  the 
ages,  and  finally  and  chiefly  of  Christ.  The  type 
here,  like  many  prophecies,  has  its  successive  anti- 
types, all  leading  on  to  the  one  final  and  perfect  Anti- 
type ;  but  in  all  there  is  the  same  lesson — that  God 

*  Contra  Faust,  lib.  xv.  2  (also  xix.  31). 

f  Fairbairn,  ubi  stip.  p.  71.  %  Deut.  xviii,  15. 


236  THE   OLD  AND  NEW    TESTAMENTS. 

will  not  leave  His  people  without  guidance,  but  will 
send  to  them  those  who  shall  declare  His  will. 

So  also  in  the  case  of  Elijah.  He  is  expressly  de- 
clared by  the  last  of  the  prophets  to  be  a  typeof 
the  forerunner  of  our  Lord.'^  Malachi  indeed  so  ex- 
presses this  that  the  Jews,  as  always,  clinging  to  the 
outward  form,  expected  to  see  Eljiah  in  person  ;  but 
the  angel  in  announcing  his  birth,f  Zecharias  in  his 
song  of  thanksgiving,:]:  and  our  Lord  in  two  dis- 
courses with  His  disciples  §  showed  that  Elijah  was 
a  type  fulfilled  in  John.  He  was  a  type  because  he 
was  a  messenger  sent  from  God  to  turn  His  people 
from  their  sins  and  avert  from  them  His  threat- 
ened wrath.  In  this  case  the  Old  Testament  sim- 
ply sets  forth  the  type,  without  expressly  saying 
that  it  was  only  a  type.  That  was  left  to  be  under- 
stood. 

David  also  was  a  type,  and  his  typical  character 
becomes  plain  on  putting  different  passages  together. 
In  many  places  the  Messiah  is  foretold  as  the  de- 
scendant of  David  who  shall  sit  upon  his  throne,  as 
"  the  Root  and  offspring  of  David,"  and  under  such 
like  expressions  ;  on  the  other  hand,  in  Jeremiah,] 
Ezekiel,T  and  Hosea,*^  He  is  simply  called  David. 
There  is  but  one  explanation  of  this :  David,  as  the 
head  of  the  theocracy,  was  a  type  of  our  Lord,  and 
the  Old  Testament  gives  plain  intimation  of  this  by 
describing  the  Redeemer  to  come  now  as  David, 
now  as  the  descendant  of  David. 

*  Mai.  iii.  i;  iv.  5,6.  \  Luke,  i.  17.  %  lb.   76,  77. 

P  Matt.  xi.  14  ;  xvii.  12,  13  and  parallels.  ||  Jcr.  xxx.  9. 

^  Ezek.  xxxiv.  23,  24  ;  xxxvii.  24,  25.  **  Hos.  iii.  5. 


TYPOLOGY— CONTINUED.  237 

Prophetic  types  form  a  class  of  themselves ;  but 
there  is  a  point  in  the  connection  between  prophesy 
and  type  which  must  not  be  passed  by  here,  because 
it  shows  so  clearly  the  Old  Testament's  recognition 
of  its  own  historical  types.  It  is  a  habit  of  the  proph- 
ets to  describe  future  events  in  terms  of  the  past 
or  the  present.  So  common  is  this  that  some  critics 
have  erroneously  laid  down  as  the  law  of  all  proph- 
ecy, that  it  can  only  take  hold  of  the  past  or  the 
present  and  project  it  with  necessary  modifications 
into  the  future.  As  a  universal  rule  this  is  thor- 
oughly false  ;  as  the  statement  of  a  common  habit,  it 
is  eminently  true.  Thus  when  Hosea  would  foretell 
the  punishment  to  com^e  upon  the  people,  he  says  : 
"  They  shall  return  to  Egypt,"  *  "  Ephraim  shall  re- 
turn to  Egypt,"  f  and  again,  '^  Egypt  shall  gather 
them  up,  Memphis  shall  bury  them  :":|:  but  a  little 
further  on  he  adds,  "  He  shall  not  return  into  the 
land  of  Egypt,  but  the  Assyrian  shall  be  his  king."§ 
That  is,  the  bondage  in  Egypt  was  a  type  of  the 
coming  woe,  but  the  actual  place  of  suffering  should 
be  in  Assyria.  The  passages  in  which  the  various 
prophets  foretell  the  return  from  the  Babylonian 
captivity  or  the  greater  Messianic  deliverance  under 
figures  taken  from  the  Exodus  are  too  many  and  too 
familiar  to  require  especial  mention.  It  is  not  sur- 
prising therefore  that  the  New  Testament  writers 
should  have  regarded  these  and  similiar  events  as 
typical  when  their  character  in  this  respect  had  been 
so  often  intimated  in  the  Old  Testament. 

*  Hos.  viii.  13.  fix.  3.  if  ix.  6. 

§  xi.  5.     More  elaborate  instances  occur  jn  Ezek.  iv.  and  xx. 


238  THE  OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

There  is  one  book  which,  from  its  peculiar  charac- 
ter, may  demand  a  word  in  connection  with  this 
subject.  The  book  of  Psalms  is  a  collection  of  the 
songs  of  the  sanctuary  and  even  of  private  devotion 
gathered  through  many  ages.  In  it  the  Psalmists 
brought  their  past  history  and  the  story  of  their 
present  experiences  before  God  in  sacred  songs  of 
prayer  and  praise.  It  was  to  be  expected  that  the 
typical  elements  of  that  history  would  come  out 
more  abundantly  than  elsewhere  in  this  solemn  and 
religious  use  of  it.  Accordingly  we  find  the  Psalms 
abounding  in  types  and  frequently  quoted  by  the 
New  Testament  writers  in  a  typical  character.  Es- 
pecially David,  the  first  godly  monarch  of  Israel,  the 
first  to  restore  its  orderly  worship  after  long  ages  of 
abounding  sin  and  idolatry,  the  first  head  of  the 
theocracy  who  was  *'  a  man  after  God's  own  heart," 
yet  encompassed  with  opposition  and  evil — it  was 
natural  that  he  should  stand  out  in  his  life  and  in  his 
work,  as  pre-eminently  a  type  of  the  royal  Prophet 
who,  after  the  flesh,  should  be  descended  from  him. 
So  close  is  the  type  in  this  case  that  the  line  which 
separates  type  from  prophecy  is  hard  to  be  distin- 
guished, and  it  is  sometimes  difficult  to  say,  as  in 
the  case  of  Ps.  xxii.,  whether  the  utterances  are 
simply  prophecies,  or  whether  they  are  primarily 
applicable  to  David's  own  experiences,  but  to  him 
as  a  type  of  his  greater  son.  Practically,  it  makes 
little  difference  how  this  question  is  decided  ;  but  in 
the  discussion  of  typology  it  is  very  interesting,  both 
as  showing  how  typical  was  much  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment   history,  and    also  as    showing   the   value   of 


TYPOLOGY— CONTINUED.  239 

the  type  in  this  very  close  approximation  to  pro- 
phecy. 

These  types  on  the  border  line  between  the  his- 
toric and  the  prophetic  class  are  so  numerous,  and 
are  so  frequently  used  in  the  New  Testament,  that 
something  further  needs  to  be  said  about  them. 
They  are  of  two  kinds  : 

{a)  Those  which  are  general  in  their  application. 
These  often  have  what  Bacon  calls  "  a  springing  and 
germinant  accomplishment,"  and  thus  come  to  have 
many  antitypes.  Their  fulfilment  is  not  confined  to 
a  single  person  or  event,  but  finds  answering  persons 
or  events  in  many  who  have  been  in  various  respects 
made  like  to  Christ,  and  in  their  experiences,  while 
its  highest  fulfilment  is  in  Him  or  in  His  life.  Some 
of  these  germinant  types  are  of  such  a  nature  that 
they  must  have  continuous  antitypes  while  man 
continues  in  a  state  of  probation.  Thus,  when  Moses 
chose  ''  rather  to  suffer  affliction  with  the  people 
of  God,  than  to  enjoy  the  pleasures  of  sin  for  a 
season,  esteeming  the  reproach  of  Christ  greater 
riches  than  the  treasures  of  Egypt,"  *  he  was  a  type 
of  a  long  line  of  Old  Testament  saints  as  well  as  of 
the  followers  of  Christ  in  all  ages,  but  above  all  of 
Christ  Himself.  Other  types  of  this  kind  belong  so 
exclusively  to  a  preparatory  dispensation  that  when 
Christ  came  they  reached  their  absolute  fulfilment, 
and  there  could  be  nothing  further.  These  two 
varieties  need  not  be  separated  in  their  treatment. 
Several  of  the  types  already  cited  belong  to  this 
class,  and  other  instances  are  not  far  to  seek.    At  the 

*  Heb.  xi.  25,  26. 


240  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

time  of  our  Lord's  first  purification  of  the  temple,  St. 
John  says,  *'  His  disciples  remembered  that  it  was 
written,  Tlie  zeal  of  thine  house  hath  eaten  me  up."  * 
The  quotation  is  from  the  Psalms,  f  and  was  true  of 
David  and  of  every  earnest  Israelite,  as  Hezekiah, 
or  Josiah,  or  the  Maccabees,  who  gave  up  his  per- 
sonal ease  and  comfort  and  incurred  reproach  and 
suffering  in  his  zeal  for  the  house  of  the  Lord  ;  it  is 
true,  again,  of  every  faithful  follower  of  Christ  under 
similar  circumstances.  But  its  highest  and  chiefest 
fulfilment  was  in  Him  to  whom  His  disciples  applied 
its  words.  So  also  when  our  Lord  says  in  reference 
to  the  traitor  Judas,  "that  the  Scripture  may  be 
fulfilled.  He  that  eateth  bread  with  Me  hath  lifted 
up  his  heel  against  Me."  %  From  the  context,  there 
is  reason  to  suppose  that  David  spoke  immediately 
and  directly  of  the  treachery  which  he  himself  ex- 
perienced. §  His  words  have  again  and  again  been 
verified  in  the  troubles  of  many  saints.  But  such  an 
experience  was  to  be  expected  especially  in  the  life 
of  the  King  of  Saints.  The  historic  became  a  pro- 
phetic type,  and  thus  our  Lord  could  say  of  it  "  that 
the  Scripture  may  be  fulfilled " — that  the  words 
spoken  of  old  may  have  their  higher  and  greater 
realization.  The  same  things  are  to  be  said  of 
another  expression  of  our  Lord,  "  that  the  word 
might  be  fulfilled  that  is  written  in  their  law.  They 
hated  me  without  a  cause."  [  It  was  fulfilled  in 
innumerable  instances  in  the  past,  it  continues  daily 
to  be  fulfilled  now  ;  but  its  greatest  fulfilment   was 

*  John,  ii.  17.  t  Ps.  Ixix.  9.  %  John,  xiii.  18. 

§  Ps.  xli.  9.  I  John,  XV.  25  ;  Ps.  Ixix.  4. 


TYPOLOGY— CONTINUED.  24 1 

in  Christ.  These,  and  many  others  Hke  them,  are 
primarily  rather  historical  statements  than  prophe- 
cies ;  they  are  the  record  of  the  personal  experiences 
of  the  writers.  Yet  they  are  of  such  a  kind  as  to  be 
often  fulfilled  in  God's  church  and  people,  and  pre- 
eminently in  Christ  when  working  out  man's  re- 
demption. But  the  New  Testament  evidently 
claims  for  them  something  more  than  this  ;  it  points 
plainly  to  a  prophetic  element  in  them  and  shows 
that  the  life  of  our  Lord,  in  these  respects,  was  a 
fulfilment  of  them.  The  ground  of  such  claim  is 
this  :  as  history  these  passages  relate  to  persons  who 
were  types  of  Christ,  and  hence  from  being  descrip- 
tive of  the  one,  they  necessarily  became  prophetic 
of  the  other.  Not  everything  in  the  personal  his- 
tory of  such  persons  is  prophetic,  but  only  what  be- 
longs to  their  history  in  their  typical  character.  To 
illustrate  by  a  more  obscure  example  :  '*  Jesus  spoke 
unto  the  multitude  in  parables,  and  without  a 
parable  spake  He  not  unto  them  ;  that  it  might  be 
fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  the  prophet,  I  will 
open  my  mouth  in  parables  ;  I  will  utter  things 
which  have  been  kept  secret  from  the  foundation  of 
the  world."*  The  Psalm  from  which  this  is  quoted 
describes  the  experience  of  the  writer  as  a  prophet ;  f 
the  description  belongs  to  all  who  bear  the  prophetic 
ofifice,and  hence  must  necessarily  be  fulfilled  in  Christ. 
{b)  The  second  subdivision  of  this  kind  of  types 
is  of  the  same  general  character,  but  differs  from  it 
in  having  only  one  specific  application.  But  two 
instances  need  be  given.    One  of  these,  St.  Matthew's 

*  Matt.  xiii.  35.  f  Ps.  Ixxviii.  2. 

16 


242  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

quotation  from  Hosea,  "  out  of  Egypt  have  I  called 
my  Son,"*  has  already  been  explained  in  the  lecture 
on  prophecy,  and  unless  it  is  to  be  treated  as  merely 
a  use  of  the  prophet's  words  by  way  of  accommoda- 
tion, must  be  regarded  as  a  prophetic  type  having  a 
specific  application.  The  other  instance  is  more 
doubtful.  When  the  soldiers  forebore  to  break  the 
legs  of  our  Lord  upon  the  cross,  St.  John  says : 
**  These  things  were  done  that  the  Scripture  should 
be  fulfilled,  a  bone  of  him  shall  not  be  broken."  f 
This  may,  as  many  think,  refer  to  the  language  of 
the  Psalm,  "  Many  are  the  afiflictions  of  the  right- 
eous ;  but  the  Lord  delivereth  him  out  of  them  all. 
He  keepeth  all  his  bones  :  not  one  of  them  is  bro- 
ken." X  It  would  then  be  a  specific  application  of  a 
general,  spiritual  promise,  given  to  all  who  are  loved 
of  God,  to  a  literal  event  in  the  life  of  the  beloved 
Son.  Another  interpretation,  however,  brings  it 
strictly  within  the  class  of  prophetic  types  having  a 
specific  application.  Many  consider  that  St.  John  here 
refers  to  the  command  concerning  the  paschal  lamb, 
"  Neither  shall  ye  break  a  bone  thereof."  §  The  Pass- 
over was  certainly  a  prominent  type  of  Christ  in  his 
death,  and  there  is  no  other  obvious  reason  for  this 
command  than  that  it  might  thus  point  more  clearly 
to  its  Antitype.  The  difficulty  in  this  case  is  that 
the  resemblance  is  merely  an  outward  one ;  there  is 
no  especial  lesson  of  future  truth  conveyed  by  the 
command.  But  the  answer  is  obvious  :  the  type  did 
not  consist  in  this  command,  but  in   the  truths  set 

*  Hos.  xi.  i;  Matt.  ii.  15.  f  John,  xix.  36 

X  Ps.  xxxiv.  19,  20.  §  Ex.  xii.  46. 


TYPOLOGY—  CONTINUED,  243 

forth  by  the  Passover,  and  this  and  other  external 
features  were  merely  marks  of  resemblance,  sign- 
manuals  as  it  were,  to  lead  the  mind  to  the  deeper 
inward  connection.  The  command,  which  had  no 
obvious  importance  in  regard  to  the  paschal  lamb 
itself,  was  yet  made  a  part  of  its  law  to  awaken  at- 
tention and  inquiry  into  its  inward  meaning,  and 
when  that  meaning  was  fulfilled  upon  the  cross,  there 
was  a  correspondence  also  in  the  outward  form 
that  this  fulfilment  might  be  the  better  understood. 

III. 

The  last  general  class  of  types  are  those  which 
occur  in  combination  with  prophecy,  and  hence  may 
be  called  Prophetic  Types.  No  sharp  line  of  dis- 
tinction can  be  drawn  between  these  and  the  classes 
already  treated,  since  all  types  have  a  certain  pro- 
phetic character;  yet  they  have  enough  of  com- 
mon characteristics  to  justify  their  discussion  as  a 
special  class. 

There  are  three  forms  of  combination  of  prophecy 
and  type : 

(i)  The  first  form  embraces  those  passages  in 
which  things  typical  in  the  past  or  the  present  are 
declared  in  distinct  prophecy  as  to  appear  again  in 
the  future,  type  and  prophecy  being  thus  combined 
to  show  forth  the  things  of  the  future.  This  is  easy 
enough  to  understand  in  the  abstract  statement,  for 
it  is  the  ordinary  action  of  the  human  mind  to  set 
forth  the  unknown  by  means  of  the  known,  and  to 
compare  the   thing    to  be   taught  with   something 


244  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

already  learned.  So  in  prophecy  the  future  is  shad- 
owed forth  by  the  past  or  the  present.  Sufficient 
instances  have  already  been  given.  It  is  only  to  be 
remarked  that  in  this  kind  of  type  the  connection 
with  the  antitype  need  not  be  so  close,  since  it  is 
here  pointed  out  by  its  combination  with  prophecy. 
Thus,  in  the  case  of  the  crowning  of  the  high-priest 
Joshua  with  the  double  crown  ^  (a  type  nowhere 
mentioned  in  the  New  Testament),  the  prophet  goes 
immediately  on  to  speak  of  "  the  man  whose  name 
is  the  Branch,"  who  "  shall  be  a  priest  upon  His 
throne,"  and  no  doubt  is  left  as  to  his  meaning. 

(2)  The  second  subdivision  is  a  modification  of 
the  last.  In  this  the  type,  not  expressly,  but  in  its 
essential  principles,  is  embodied  in  prophecy  fore- 
telling things  that  correspond  in  character,  but  which 
are  of  higher  moment.  This  need  not  be  dwelt 
upon,  but  Psalm  ii.  and  many  others  may  be  referred 
to  as  examples. 

(3)  The  third  and  last  kind  of  combination  of  type 
with  prophecy  is  that  in  which  the  type  itself  is  fu- 
ture and  is  foretold.  In  this  case  (a)  the  prophecy 
in  foretelling  the  type  may  also  look  forward  to  the 
antitype ;  or  (b)  realizing  the  future  type  as  if  it 
were  actually  present,  it  may  look  forth  from  that 
standpoint  upon  the  antitype.  This  kind  of  pro- 
phetic type  is  particularly  common  in  the  prophecies 
relating  to  the  restoration  from  the  Babylonian  cap- 
tivity. Taking  this  as  a  type,  they  either  predict  in 
connection  with  it  the  subsequent  glory  of  Jerusalem 
in  the  Messianic  restoration  and   the  glory  of  the 

*  Zech.  vi.  10-13. 


T  YPOLOG  Y— CONTINUED.  245 

Christian  church,  sometimes  even  passing  on  to  the 
glory  of  the  church  triumphant  or  else  they  look  out 
upon  these  things  from  the  standpoint  of  the  type  as 
if  it  were  already  accomplished.  This  is  very  marked 
in  the  last  twenty-seven  chapters  of  Isaiah,  and  has 
been  the  chief  reason  for  the  controversy  about  the 
authorship  of  that  part  of  the  book.  It  is  also  char- 
acteristic of  chapters  xxxiv.  and  xxxv.  of  the  same 
book,  and  in  the  New  Testament  of  our  Lord's 
prophecy  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  of 
the  end  of  the  world.* 

This  is  the  nearest  approach  ever  made  in  proph- 
ecy to  what  is  called  "  a  double  sense,"  of  which 
more  hereafter.  Yet  there  is  here  really  nothing 
which  answers  to  that  term  as  commonly  under- 
stood. The  prophet  by  no  means  speaks  of  one  thing 
plainly,  while  his  words  are  also  to  be  understood  of 
another  and  totally  different  thing.  He  simply 
foretells  the  type  in  connection  with  the  antitype, 
the  preparatory  in  connection  with  its  fulfilment. 
The  two  things  are  not  different  and  disconnected, 
but  are,  so  to  speak,  on  the  same  line  of  prophetic 
vision.  Undoubtedly  this  sometimes  leads  to  con- 
siderable difficulties  of  interpretation,  but  always 
such  as  may  be  solved  by  careful  study  and  applica- 
tion of  the  principles  of  prophetic  typology.  This 
may  be  illustrated  by  another  matter.  The  New 
Testament  so  continually  speaks  of  death  in  imme- 
diate connection  with  heaven,  ordinarily  overlooking 
the  intermediate  state,  that  numberless  Christians 
have  been  found  to  deny  the  existence  of  that  state 
*  Matt.  xxiv. ;  Mark,  xiii. ;  Luke,  xxi. 


246  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

altogether.  Yet  it  also  distinctly  speaks  of  that 
state,  and  it  is  a  necessary  consequence  of  the  in- 
terval which  it  interposes  between  death  and  the 
resurrection.  So,  frequently  in  this  kind  of  prophecy : 
the  prophet  gifted  to  foresee  the  type  in  connection 
with  the  antitype,  is  so  absorbed  in  its  glory  that  its 
light  is  reflected  back  upon  the  type,  and  the  two  are 
described,  as  it  were,  in  one  breath. 


LECTURE  XL 

TYPOLOGY— Concluded. 

III.  Principles  and  Directions  for  the  Interpretation  of 
Particular  Types. 

When  the  general  principles  of  typology  are  to 
be  used  in  forming  rules  for  the  interpretation  of 
particular  types,  some  points  may  be  laid  down  pos- 
itively and  definitely ;  and  others,  as  in  all  kinds  of 
interpretation,  must  be  left  to  the  good  sense  of  the 
interpreter.  It  is  impossible  to  give  definite  laws 
which  shall  apply  themselves  in  a  hard  and  fast  way 
to  every  particular  case ;  judgment  is  still  required. 
Nevertheless,  certain  rules,  plainly  resulting  from 
the  principles  which  have  been  discussed,  may  be 
laid  down  with  certainty,  and  these  will  go  far  in  re- 
moving vagueness  and  serving  as  guides. 

I.  The  first  and  most  comprehensive  of  these  rules 
is  negative.  Nothing  in  the  Old  Testament,  in  it- 
self forbidden  or  sinful,  can  be  a  type  of  the  good 
things  of  the  Gospel.  This  rule  may  seem  sufficiently 
obvious,  and  yet  is  not  infrequently  disregarded. 
Its  reason  lies  in  the  nature  of  the  connection  be- 
tween the  type  and  the  antitype  as  teaching  the 
same  essential  truth  ;  what  is  opposed  to  the  Divine 
will  cannot,  except  by  contrast,  teach  what  God 
would  have  to  be  done.     To  illustrate:  Jacob,  in  the 


248  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS, 

garments  of  Esau,  receiving  his  father's  blessing,  has 
been  often  cited  as  a  type  of  the  Christian's  being 
blessed  in  the  garments  of  Christ !  This  is  an  utter 
perversion  of  a  mere  external  resemblance.  Recall 
for  a  moment  the  facts  in  the  case,  which  have  al- 
ready been  explained.  Jacob,  before  his  birth,  had 
been  promised  the  blessing  of  the  first-born,  which 
included  the  ancestry  of  the  world's  Redeemer.  If 
we  believe  in  the  faithfulness  of  God,  we  know  that 
this  promise  must  and  would  have  been  fulfilled 
without  a  resort  to  any  sinful  devices ;  but  it  was 
actually  obtained  through  a  miserable  fraud. 

Contrast  with  this  the  Christian's  being  blessed  in 
Christ.  By  faith  and  love  he  becomes  so  united  with 
his  Master  that  he  is  a  member  of  the  body  of  which 
Christ  is  Head.  Christ  dwells  in  him,  and  "  his  life 
is  hid  with  Christ  in  God.''^  He  receives  blessing, 
not  because  he  pretends  to  be,  but  because  he  is,  in 
reality,  united  with  the  Blessed  One.  What  con- 
nection is  there  between  the  two  ?  What  teaching  of 
truth  have  they  in  common  ?  There  is  great  danger 
in  the  adducing  of  such  things  as  types.  The  mind 
instinctively  feels  that  the  type  and  the  antitype 
must  be  connected,  and  therefore  is  either  led  to 
gloss  over  the  abominable  sin  of  the  alleged  type,  or 
else  to  look  upon  the  antitype  as  a  mere  external 
matter,  with  a  fearful  loss  of  consciousness  of  the 
living  inward  union  between  Christ  and  the  believer, 
or,  at  least,  a  belittling  and  impoverishment  of  its 
meaning. 

The  same  vicious  system  of  typology  has    been 

*  Col.  iii.  3. 


TYPOLOGY— CONCLUDED.  249 

carried  further  in  making  the  consequences  of  Jacob's 
sin  prefigure  Christ's  Hfe  ;  but  one  example  is  enough 
to  show  the  essential  falsity  of  all  such  types  in  which 
what  is  unholy  and  wrong  is  made  a  foreshadowing 
example  of  the  good. 

An  evil  thing,  however,  may  be  typical  of  evil,  and 
many  examples  of  this  are  to  be  found.  Thus,  Hagar 
and  her  descendants,  persecuting  the  child  of  prom- 
ise and  his  heirs,  were  made  by  St.  Paul  to  typify 
the  Jews,  in  reliance  on  their  carnal  descent,  oppos- 
ing the  true  spiritual  Church.  ^  So  also,  Egypt,  the 
land  of  bondage,  and  Edom,  the  persistent  foe  of 
Israel,  are  continually  made  by  the  old  prophets  to 
signify  any  and  every  nation  which  oppressed  the 
Church  of  God.f  And  in  the  New  Testament,  Baby- 
lon is  frequently  used  in  the  Book  of  Revelation  as 
a  type  of  the  great  worldly  power  opposed  to  the 
Kingdom  of  God  ;  :j:  and  so  what  was  spoken  by 
David  of  the  enmity  and  devices  of  Ahithopel,  Doeg, 
and  others,  against  himself  as  the  head  of  the  the- 
ocracy, becomes  typical  of  the  enemies  of  his  anti- 
type. This  is  but  to  say  that,  if  the  type  cast  a 
shadow,  that  shadow  becomes  typical  of  the  similar 
shadow  cast  by  the  antitype.  The  truth  in  the  an- 
titype must  expect  to  encounter  a  like  opposition  to 
that  encountered  by  the  type. 

II.  A  second  rule  for  the  determination  of  types 
and  of  their  meaning  is,  that  we  are  to  be  guided, 
not  exclusively  by  the  ancient  understanding  of 
them,  but  also  by  the  light  thrown  back  upon  them 

*  Gal.  iv.  21-31.  f  Zech.  x.  10,  11,  and  frequently. 

X  Rev.  xiv.  8  ;  xvi.  19  ;  xvii.  5  ;  xviii.,2,  10,  21. 


250  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

from  the  New  Testament.  This  rule  results  from 
several  considerations : 

id)  From  the  Preparatory  Nature  of  Types, — If  we 
would  understand  the  bud  we  must  study  it  in  the 
light  thrown  back  upon  it  by  the  flower  and  the 
fruit,  and  the  lungs  of  the  embryo,  or  the  wing-cases 
of  the  chrysalis,  would  be  incomprehensible  without 
a  knowledge  of  the  perfect  form.  It  is  always  difficult 
to  understand  the  means  by  which  apurpose  is  brought 
to  pass  without  a  knowledge  of  the  purpose  itself. 
Yet,  in  the  time  when  the  types  were  given,  men 
were  unable  to  appreciate  the  more  complete  reve- 
lation to  follow.  They  were  the  spiritual  infants  of 
the  world's  spring-time,  learning  what  they  might 
from  the  starting  bud  and  the  early  flower ;  but  in 
the  harvest  we  must  be  able  better  to  understand 
the  meaning  of  the  enigmas  by  which  they  were  sur- 
rounded. 

{U)  Froin  the  Analogy  of  Prophecy. — The  prophets 
themselves,  in  many  cases,  did  not  understand  the 
meaning  of  the  predictions  they  uttered.  Daniel 
expressly  says :  "  I  heard,  but  I  understood  not," 
and  the  vision  was  not  explained  to  him,  but  he  was 
told  to  go  his  way,  "  for  the  words  are  closed  up  and 
sealed  till  the  time  of  the  end."  "^  St.  Peter  says 
generally  of  the  prophets  of  old,  "of  which  salvation 
the  prophets  have  enquired  and  searched  diligently, 
.  .  .  .  searching  what,  or  what   manner  of  time  the 

Spirit  of  Christ  which  was  in  them  did  signify 

Unto  whom  it  was  revealed,  that  not  unto  them- 
selves,  but    unto  us  they  did  minister   the    things 

*  Dan.  xii.  8-13. 


TYPOLOG  Y—CONCL  UDED,  2$  I 

which  are  now  reported  unto  you."  *  If  this  were 
true  of  that  clearer  form  of  indicating  the  future  in 
words,  a  fortiori  must  it  be  true  of  the  less  distinct 
revelation  through  types ;  and  if  we  can  only  fully 
interpret  the  prophecies  in  the  light  of  their  fulfil- 
ment, much  more  must  this  be  the  case  with  the 
types.  It  is  plain  then,  from  the  analogy  of  proph- 
ecy, that  we  must  study  them  in  the  light  thrown 
back  upon  them  from  the  antitype. 

{c)  From  the  History  of  Israel. — This  cannot  in- 
deed prove  directly  that  use  must  be  made  of  the 
New  Testament  in  determining  the  significance  of 
the  types  of  the  Old ;  but,  indirectly,  it  has  an  im- 
portant bearing  upon  the  point.  For  the  progress  of 
teaching  in  the  Old  Testament,  especially  in  regard 
to  the  sacrifices,  leads  us  to  expect  a  more  perfect 
treatment  of  these,  as  well  as  of  other  types,  in  the 
New.  The  history  of  the  older  revelations  shows  a 
distinct  tendency  towards  a  better  understanding  of 
the  types  first  given  ;  we  cannot  but  expect  this 
tendency  to  reach  its  goal  in  the  final  revelation. 

(d)  From  the  way  in  which  the  things  of  the  Anti- 
type  are  spoken  of  in  the  New  Testament  as  a 
"•^  Mystery''  not  revealed  of  old,  but "  now  made  known.'' 
— Yet,  those  things  were  shadowed  forth  in  the  type, 
and  if  not  then  "  revealed  "  so  that  men  could  know 
them,  it  must  have  been  because  the  type  could  only 
be  fully  understood  in  connection  with  the  antitype. 

{e)  From  the  Analogy  between  Gods  works  in  Na- 
ture and  in  Revelation. — Everywhere  He  gives  inti- 
mations of  the  future ;  but  He  does  not  so  write 
*  I  Pet.  i.  10-12. 


252  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

history  beforehand  that  men  can  tell  more  than  the 
great  and  broad  features  of  that  which  is  to  come  to 
pass.  So  in  nature.  The  knowledge  gained  from 
experience  of  the  seasons,  or  from  observations  of 
the  solar  system,  enables  men  to  formulate  laws  by 
which  they  can  predict  future  phenomena  ;  but  with- 
out that  experience  or  observation  they  would  be 
quite  unable  to  interpret  the  predictions  with  which 
nature  everywhere  abounds.  Types,  as  foreshadow- 
ing examples  connected  by  deep  spiritual  laws  with 
what  is  to  follow,  in  the  same  way  must  be  examined 
with  the  explanation  of  the  antitype  in  order  that 
their  full  significance  may  be  disclosed. 

Notwithstanding  the  importance  of  this  principle, 
it  is  often  carried  too  far,  for  it  is  not  easy  to  sepa- 
rate in  our  minds  between  what  was  actually  taught 
by  the  type  in  its  time,  and  the  instruction  we  are 
able  to  gather  from  it  through  the  explanation  of 
the  antitype.  Yet,  it  is  very  necessary  to  make  this 
distinction,  and  while  we  ourselves  study  the  type 
with  all  the  advantage  of  our  fuller  knowledge,  to 
see  what  it  must  have  been,  and  how  much  in- 
struction it  actually  did  convey  apart  from  that 
knowledge.  It  is  only  in  this  way  that  we  can  ap- 
preciate the  true  character  of  the  Old  Testament 
worthies.  It  is  only  by  a  just  guaging  of  their  relig- 
ious knowledge  that  we  can  form  any  true  estimate 
of  their  conduct.  It  is  only  by  viewing  the  types  as 
they  stand  by  themselves,  and  generally  all  the  reve- 
lation of  old,  apart  from  the  light  of  the  Gospel, 
that  we  can  arrive  at  any  right  understanding  of  the 
Old  Testament  history  and  of  the  progress   of  its 


T  YPOLOG  Y—CONCL  UDED.  253 

revelation.  And  doing  this,  we  shall  see  how  very 
much  of  the  light  that  shines  upon  our  minds  from 
its  pages  is  reflected  back  from  the  final  revelation 
of  the  New  Testament. 

III.  A  third  rule  may  be  considered  as  the  com- 
plement of  the  last,  but  requires  a  separate  state- 
ment :  an  alleged  type  must  be  examined  to  see 
whether  it  is  really  preparatory  for  the  antitype  by 
teaching  to  the  men  of  its  time  the  same  essential 
truth  ;  otherwise  it  is  to  be  rejected.  This  rule 
necessarily  follows  from  the  previous  discussion  of 
typology,  and  is  the  most  important  rule  of  all. 
For  example,  the  stone  which  Jacob  took  for  a 
pillow  at  Bethel  has  been  spoken  of  as  a  type  of 
Christ  as  ''the  cornerstone"  of  the  Church.  It 
may  be  questioned  whether  this  particular  example 
can  be  admitted  by  common  sense  even  to  the  posi- 
tion of  an  illustration  ;  certainly  its  claim  to  be  a 
type  must  be  ruled  out.  There  was  here  no  pre- 
paratory teaching ;  there  was  nothing  in  the  pro- 
posed type  to  suggest  to  the  men  of  the  time  any 
truth  which  should  fit  their  minds  for  the  antitype. 
Certainly  there  was  a  type  in  connection  with  Jacob 
at  that  time.  In  his  vision  he  saw  a  ladder  set  up 
from  earth  to  heaven  and  the  angels  of  God  ascend- 
ing and  descending  upon  it.*  Exile  from  home 
and  lonely  wanderer  as  he  was,  he  was  hereby 
taught  that  there  is  a  connection  between  heaven 
and  earth,  that  God  will  care  for  and  watch  over 
them  that  trust  in  Him,  and  that  His  '■'•  angels  are  all 
ministering  spirits  sent  forth  to  minister  for  them 
*  Gen.  xxviii.  12-15. 


254  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

who  shall  be  heirs  of  salvation  ; "  ^  and  our  Lord 
taught  Nathaniel  that  this  was  a  type  and  that  He 
was  Himself  the  true  ladder,  the  connection  be- 
tween heaven  and  earth,  in  and  through  whom  the 
Father's  care  for  man  was  exercised,  f  The  diffi- 
culty is  that  some  minds,  having  thus  recognized 
the  existence  of  a  type  and  not  content  with  its 
main  truth,  think  it  may  be  extended  to  every  par- 
ticular of  the  surrounding  circumstances.  It  is  the 
same  disposition  which  seeks  to  give  a  spiritual 
application  to  every  detail  of  a  parable  or  illustra- 
tion, forgetting  the  homely  proverb,  as  true  of 
types  as  of  illustrations,  "  Parables  do  not  run  on 
all  fours."  Much  of  such  typology  may  be  found 
in  a  certain  class  of  sermons  and  of  devotional 
works.  They  are  not  always  to  be  condemned  if 
considered  merely  as  pious  meditations, — that  must 
depend  much  on  the  character  of  the  mind  making 
use  of  them, — but  in  any  case  they  are  not  types  in 
the  true  sense  of  the  term.  In  the  true  type,  al- 
though its  full  meaning  only  appears  in  the  antitype, 
yet  there  must  have  been  some  teaching  to  the  m^n 
to  whom  it  was  given,  designed  to  fit  and  prepare 
their  minds  for  that  higher  truth  of  which  it  was  the 
"  foreshadowing  example."  This  is  the  essential 
point  not  only  of  this  particular  rule,  but  of  the 
whole  of  typology,  and  there  is  great  danger  in  its 
neglect.  There  is  always  a  more  or  less  distinct 
consciousness  that  there  should  be  a  correspondence 
between  the  type  and  the  antitype,  and  if  a  faulty 
type  has  been  selected,  there  will  be  a  tendency  to 
*  Heb.  i.  14.  f  John,  i.  51 


TYPOLOG  Y—CONCL  UDED.  255 

force  the  antitype  into  harmony  with  it.  I  cannot 
but  think  that  much  unsound  teaching  concerning 
Christ's  sacrifice  has  resulted  from  dwelHng  in  con- 
nection with  it  upon  Abraham's  sacrifice  of  Isaac. 
The  one  is  nowhere  alluded  to  in  Scripture  as  a  type 
of  the  other,  and  the  points  emphasized  concerning 
it,  both  in  the  narrative  and  in  the  New  Testament 
references  to  it,  are  always  the  faith  and  obedience 
of  the  father,  while  nothing  is  anywhere  said  of  the 
voluntary  action  of  Isaac. 

IV.  It  is  somewhat  difficult  to  state  the  fourth 
rule  in  a  way  to  avoid  misunderstanding.  It  may 
be  broadly  put,  "  the  type  itself  has  but  one  radical 
idea;"  yet  this  must  be  taken  in  connection  with 
the  qualifications  that  follow.  The  point  of  the  rule 
is  that  the  type  must  contain  some  distinct  and  in- 
telligible teaching;  it  has  no  ''double  sense"  or 
ambiguous  and  equivocal  meaning,  but  was  designed 
to  teach  consistent  and  comprehensible  truth.  Of 
course,  that  truth  may  be  in  itself  many  sided  and 
separable  into  several  truths,  and  so  also  may  be 
the  truth  in  the  antitype,  as  has  been  already  ex- 
plained. The  point  is  simply,  in  accordance  with 
all  that  has  been  said,  that  the  essence  of  the  type 
consists  in  its  teachings,  and  that  one  type  cannot 
teach  entirely  different  and  unrelated  things.  It 
must  first  be  determined  what  it  teaches,  and  it  can 
only  be  a  type  of  that  which  contains  essentially 
the  same  teaching. 

This  rule  results  from  the  educational  purpose  of 
the  Old  Testament  transactions,  laws,  and  institu- 
tions.    If  their  meaning  was  indefinite,  vague,  and 


256  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

ambiguous,  equally  capable  of  teaching  diverse 
things,  they  could  have  had  small  value  for  the  pur- 
poses of  instruction.  The  trumpet  would  have  given 
an  uncertain  sound.  They  would  have  been  but 
riddles  to  the  men  to  whom  they  were  given,  and 
could  have  had  no  effect  in  preparing  for  that  which 
was  to  follow.  It  may  be  said  that  while  the  type 
originally  had  a  definite  meaning  and  so  has  a  defi- 
nite antitype  ;  yet  it  is  capable  of  being  applied 
to  other  things,  and  so  becomes  a  type  also  of  them. 
Certainly  we  may  make  such  applications,  just  as  we 
may  quote  any  words  of  Scripture  and  apply  them 
to  circumstances  which  they  happen  to  fit ;  but  this 
is  what  is  technically  called  "  quotation  by  way  of 
accommodation,"  and  as  it  does  not  make  of  the 
words  quoted  a  prophecy,  so  neither  does  it  make 
of  the  example  cited  a  type.  It  is  no  violation  of 
this  rule  that  a  truth  and  its  necessary  converse 
should  both  be  taught  by  one  and  the  same  type. 
Thus  God's  blessing  on  the  righteous  and  His  cor- 
responding judgment  on  the  wicked  is  taught  by 
the  same  event  of  Lot's  delivery  from  Sodom  on  its 
overthrow  (see  2  Pet.  ii.  6-9).  The  point  is  that  the 
teaching  of  the  type  must  be  without  ambiguity. 

Sometimes  the  teaching  of  a  type  is  a  far  more 
complex  idea  than  a  single  truth  and  its  converse, 
as  in  the  institution  of  sacrifice.  Here,  an  impor- 
tant part  of  the  complex  idea  is  in  the  relation  of  its 
several  component  parts  to  each  other.  Truth  was 
taught  in  such  complex  form  that  it  may  be  resolved 
into  a  whole  group  of  correlated  truths,  each  most 
closely  dependent  upon    and  connected   with   th* 


T YPOLOG  Y—CONCL  UDED,  257 

others.  In  the  case  of  such  complex  teaching  the 
antitype  must  answer  to  the  type  in  the  relation  be- 
tween the  ideas  taught,  as  well  as  to  the  separate 
parts  of  the  complex  idea,  in  order  that  the  same 
truth  may  be  conveyed,  because  this  relation  itself 
is  a  fundamental  part  of  the  teaching.  The  separate 
parts  of  the  idea  may  be  elsewhere  taught  by  sep- 
arate types,  as  in  the  original  institution  of  the 
Passover  the  priestly  mediation  was  omitted  ;  but 
when  the  complex  idea  with  the  relation  of  its  parts 
to  one  another  constitutes  the  main  teaching  of  the 
type,  the  same  complexity  and  the  same  relation 
must  be  expected  in  the  antitype.  Care  and  good 
judgment  are  necessary  to  discriminate  between 
such  complex  teaching,  and  ambiguous  teaching. 
The  distinction  between  them  is  a  real  one,  and  is 
sufficiently  obvious  on  careful  consideration;  but 
they  may  be  easily  confused  by  hasty  carelessness. 

While  a  type  can  have  but  one  teaching,  yet  that 
teaching  may  be  of  such  a  nature  as  to  admit  of 
more  than  one  antitype  in  another  way  from  the 
"  springing  and  germinant  "  types.  For  one  event 
may  be  typical  of  another,  and  the  latter  still  typify 
a  third,  so  that  there  results  a  chain  of  types,  each 
in  succession  rising  in  importance  above  that  which 
went  before.  Thus  the  Exodus  from  Egypt  was 
typical  of  the  return  from  Babylon,  and  the  return 
from  Babylon  is  frequently  used  in  Scripture  to  typify 
the  establishment  and  the  blessings  of  the  Christian 
Church,  and  the  Christian  Church  here  militant  on 
earth  is  an  obvious  type  of  the  Church  triumphant 
above.  The  same  thing  maybe  said  of  much  of  the 
17 


258  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

history  of  the  older  Church,  and  in  such  cases  the 
original  type  may  be  said  to  have  all  these  successive 
types  and  their  fulfilment  for  its  antitypes;  but  in 
all  this  there  is  no  double,  or  ambiguous,  sense. 
There  is  one  consistent  teaching  finding  repeated 
manifestations,  though  sometimes  in  diverse  ways. 

V.  One  further  rule  may  be  given  :  regard  must 
always  be  had  to  the  essential  difference  between 
the  type  and  the  antitype  involved  in  the  nature  of 
their  relation  to  one  another.  The  type  teaches. 
Divine  truth  on  a  lower  plane,  chiefly,  though  not 
entirely,  in  regard  to  the  outward,  present,  and 
earthly  ;  while  the  antitype  rises  to  a  higher  plane, 
and  teaches  chiefly  the  inward,  the  future,  and  the 
heavenly.  While  this  is  a  plain  consequence  of 
what  has  gone  before,  it  is  yet  a  vital  point.  An  al- 
leged type  is  presented  ;  does  its  antitype  teach  the 
same  truth  in  a  higher  form  ?  In  other  words,  is  the 
teaching  of  the  type  preparatory  for  that  of  the  anti- 
type ?  Unless  there  is  this  advance,  the  alleged 
type  must  be  rejected  as  useless  and  purposeless. 
For  example,  there  could  be  no  type  under  the  old 
Dispensation  of  the  unity  of  God  ;  for  that  truth  was 
itself  already  proclaimed  in  the  fullest  and  most  em- 
phatic way.  It  was  a  fundamental  truth  of  all  re- 
ligion, and  one  with  which  revelation  must  start. 
There  could  be  no  preparatory  teaching  in  the  nature 
of  the  case.  On  the  other  hand,  the  more  complete 
doctrine  of  the  Godhead  as  a  unity  in  essence  with 
a  threefold  personality,  was  not  as  yet  revealed,  and 
there  might  be  foreshadowings,  types,  of  this.  Wheth- 
er suc^  actually  existed  or  not  is  another  question  : 


TYPOLOGY—  CONCL  UDED.  259 

whether  the  minds  of  the  people  could  bear  even  in- 
timations of  this  without  being  led  into  polytheism 
must  be  decided  on  the  evidence  :  but  there  is  no 
impossibility  of  it  in  the  nature  of  a  type.  In  the 
true  type  there  is  always  an  advance  to  the  antitype, 
as  from  the  earthly  sanctuary  and  priesthood  to  the 
heavenly,  and  where  this  is  wanting  there  can  be  no 
real  type.  For  example,  in  Isaac's  bearing  the  wood 
for  the  burnt  offering,  and  Christ's  bearing  His  own 
cross,  there  is  no  advance  in  truth  ;  both  are  exter- 
nal acts,  and  are,  in  themselves,  on  the  same  plane, 
except  as  they  were  corresponding  subsidiary  actions, 
the  one  in  an  infinitely  higher  and  more  important 
event  than  the  other.  In  such  small  details  as  this, 
and  in  the  favorite  occupation  of  so  many  minds  of 
finding  the  particular  shape  of  the  cross,  or  the  color 
of  the  blood,  typified  in  a  multitude  of  things  in  the 
Old  Testament,  there  maybe  no  particular  harm,  al- 
though a  violation  of  the  principles  of  typology.  But 
it  is  to  be  remembered  that  if  this  be  harmless,  it  is 
also  in  great  danger  of  being  idle.  It  is  an  amuse- 
ment, a  spiritual  amusement,  if  one  please  so  to  call 
it ;  but  it  is  not,  and  does  not  contribute  to,  a  growth 
in  knowledge.  When,  however,  the  same  habit  is 
appHed  to  more  important  matters,  and  made  into  a 
means  of  interpreting  God's  purposes,  it  becomes 
most  pernicious.  It  is  one  form  of  holding  fast  to 
the  letter  that  killeth,  to  the  rejection  of  the  Spirit 
that  giveth  life. 

In  its  broad  statement,  this  last  rule  is  plain  enough ; 
but  there  is  sometimes  difficulty  in  its  application, 
from  the  fact  that  as  the  Old  Testament  was  not 


26o  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

merely  of  an  earthly  character,  so  the  Gospel  isnot 
exclusively  of  a  heavenly.  Both  were  revelations  to 
man  in  his  pilgrimage  through  his  earthly  sojourn 
to  his  heavenly  home.  Certainly,  on  the  one  hand, 
"  they  are  not  to  be  heard  which  feign  that  the  old 
Fathers  did  look  only  for  transitory  promises  ;"  *  and 
oa  the  other,  the  very  author  of  the  Gospel  was  not 
only  Himself  incarnate,  but  had  an  outward  and 
bodily  obedience  to  fulfil.  And  so  have  His  follow- 
ers in  the  Church  to  the  end  of  time.  Still,  there  is 
a  broad  and  easily  recognized  distinction  between 
the  two  Dispensations.  If  heavenly  truth  was  taught 
of  old,  it  was  taught  chiefly  through  the  medium  of 
earthly  transactions  and  duties  ;  and  if  earthly  duties 
are  emphasized  in  the  Gospel,  it  is  in  view  of  their 
spiritual  source  and  object.  The  Passover  was  a  true 
type  of  the  sacrifice  of  Christ.  The  killing  of  the 
former  and  the  crucifixion  of  the  latter  were  both  in 
themselves  outward  transactions,  but  the  teaching 
of  the  one  was  primarily  escape  from  temporal  death 
and  from  earthly  bondage  ;  of  the  other,  eternal  sal- 
vation and  deliverance  alike  from  the  punishment 
and  from  the  dominion  of  sin.  Except  the  Old 
Testament  had  its  spiritual  significance,  and  the 
Gospel  had  its  earthly  form,  there  could  be  no  unity 
in  the  truths  taught  by  them  ;  but  as  the  one  is  an 
advance  over  the  other  in  the  fulness  and  clearness 
of  spiritual  teaching,  so  there  must  be  a  correspond- 
ing advance  from  the  type  to  the  antitype  in  which 
that  teaching  is  embodied. 

*  Art.  7  of  the  XXXIX.  Articles. 


T  YPOL  OG  Y—CONCL  UDED.  26 1 

In  concluding  these  lectures  upon  typology  it  is 
well  to  repeat  that  so  far  as  the  mere  word  type  is 
concerned,  much  that  has  been  said  depends  upon  its 
definition.  It  has  here  been  used  in  the  sense  of 
*•  a  foreshadowing  example."  It  has  been  pointed 
out  that  the  word  is  often  used  in  other  senses,  and  the 
foregoing  discussion  may  not  always  apply  to  those 
other  senses.  Nevertheless,  it  is  desirable  to  have 
some  treatment  of  the  subject  of  "  foreshadowing 
examples,"  to  see  in  what  they  consist,  how  they  are 
to  be  recognized,  and  how  dealt  with  ;  and  for  this 
purpose  there  is  no  other  word  which  has  been  sanc- 
tioned by  usage. 

The  main  points  of  the  whole  discussion  may 
be  summed  up  in  a  single  sentence  :  A  type  is  an 
institution,  or  a  person,  or  an  historical  event  in  the 
Old  Testament  designed  to  teach,  without  ambiguity, 
truths  in  a  form  adapted  to  the  spiritual  capacity  of 
those  to  whom  they  were  given,  and  preparatory  for 
the  fuller  revelation  of  the  same  essential  truths  to 
those  who  had  attained  a  higher  spiritual  develop- 
ment through  a  more  complete  Dispensation. 


LECTURE  XII. 

THE  ALLEGED  *' DOUBLE  SENSE"  OF  SCRIPTURE, 

The  close  of  the  discussion  of  typology  seems  the 
fitting  place  to  speak  of  what  is  called  "  the  double 
sense  "  of  Prophecy,  because,  as  has  been  noted,  the 
nearest  approach  to  such  a  sense  is  in  some  cases 
the  combination  of  prophecy  with  type. 

By  *'  double  sense  "  is  to  be  understood  two  differ- 
ent senses  having  little  or  no  relation  to  one  another. 
The  term  does  not  include  those  prophecies  or  types 
which  belong  to  the  *^  springing  or  germinant " 
class  ;  for  in  these  the  earlier  partial  fulfilments  were 
in  view  from  the  outset,  and  were  included  in  the 
prediction  which  nevertheless  also  looked  on  to  a 
final  and  more  complete  fulfilment.  Neither  does 
it  include  that  which  was  spoken  of  a  type  in  its 
typical  character,  so  that  it  must  necessarily  be  true 
of  the  antitype.  But  it  involves  the  state.ment  that 
passages  of  Scripture  which  have  a  clear  meaning 
in  themselves,  and  whose  meaning  is  apparently  ex- 
hausted in  their  original  application  ;  yet  have  an- 
other sense  and  application  in  connection  with  some 
entirely  distinct  subject. 

The  notion  that  such  a  sense  exists  is  based  upon 
the  use  made  of  certain  passages  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment by  the  writers  of  the  New.     It  is  assumed  that 


''DOUBLE  SENSE"  OF  SCRIPTURE.  26^ 

they  could  not  have  made  these  quotations  other- 
wise than  in  the  sense  in  which  they  were  intended  ; 
and  since  their  use  is  entirely  different  from  the  ap- 
parent purpose  of  the  original  writer,  his  words, 
besides  this  apparent  purpose,  must  also  have 
another  and  a  different  one  which  is  not  apparent. 
Such  a  double  sense,  like  the  prophecies  and  the 
types,  if  it  exists  at  all,  cannot  be  restricted  to 
the  particular  instances  which  happen  to  occur  in 
the  New  Testament ;  if  there  is  such  a  sense,  then, 
as  in  the  parallel  cases,  these  can  be  but  examples, 
and  the  whole  Old  Testament  is  thrown  open  to  the 
treatment  of  the  cabalists  or  the  allegorists.  Never- 
theless, whatever  be  the  consequences,  they  must  be 
accepted,  if  the  fundamental  position  is  true  that  the 
New  Testament  writers  never  quote  the  Old  Scrip- 
ture in  any  other  sense  than  that  which  was  in- 
tended. 

When  St.  Matthew  *  applies  to  the  slaughter  of 
the  innocents  at  Bethlehem  the  language  of  Jere- 
miah, if  he  quotes  according  to  the  original  sense, 
it  is  clear  that  there  must  have  been  a  double 
sense  in  the  words  of  the  prophet  of  old.  For  he  is 
speaking  of  the  carrying  off  of  the  tribes  into  the 
Babylonian  captivity,  and  is  expressly  charged  to 
say,  "  Refrain  thy  voice  from  weeping  and  thine  eyes 
from  tears ;  for  ...  .  they  shall  come  again  from 
the  land  of  the  enemy  ....  to  their  own  border."  f 
Not  only  is  there  no  apparent  intention  of  Jeremiah, 
or  of  the  Spirit  who  spoke  through  him,  to  say  any- 
thing of  the  infants  at  Bethlehem,  but  his  full  mean- 

*  Matt.  ii.  17,  18.  t  Jer.  xxxi.  15,  16. 


264  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

ing  seems  to  be  exhausted  in  the  reference  to  the 
things  of  old,  and  what  he  promises  of  the  return  is 
apparently  inconsistent  with  any  other  reference. 
In  the  same  way,  St.  Paul,  speaking  of  the  final  re- 
surrection of  the  body,  says,  ''  then  shall  be  brought 
to  pass  the  saying  that  is  written,  Death  is  swallowed 
up  in  victory.  Oh,  death,  where  is  thy  sting?  Oh, 
grave,  where  is  thy  victory  ?"  *  This  is  a  free  quota- 
tion from  Hosea,t  and  it  is  perfectly  plain  that  the 
prophet  is  speaking  of  the  captivity  under  the  figure 
of  death,  and,  as  in  the  former  case,  promising  a  re- 
turn from  it.  It  may  indeed  be  said  in  this  instance 
that  the  return  from  the  captivity  was  a  type  of  the 
resurrection.  But  this  is  such  a  far-away  type  that 
it  would  be  almost  easier  to  accept  the  '*  double 
sense ;"  and,  moreover,  it  is  hardly  possible  that  it 
could  have  been  intended  as  a  type.  The  better 
part  of  the  Jews  already  believed  in  the  resurrec- 
tion ;  so  far  were  they  from  needing  any  type  to 
prepare  them  for  the  reception  of  that  doctrine  that 
here  and  in  other  places  (notably  in  Isaiah,  X  and 
less  clearly  in  the  vision  of  the  dry  bones  in  Ezekiel  §) 
the  literal  resurrection  is  used  as  a  figure  to  set  forth 
that  which  is  spiritual.  When  a  doctrine  is  so  well 
recognized  as  to  be  a  basis  for  the  teaching  of  other 
truth,  it  can  hardly  be  claimed  that  this  other  truth 
is  a  type  to  set  forth  that  doctrine  itself.  There  are 
a  few  other  passages  in  which  quotations  are  made 
in  an  evidently  different  sense  from  that  in  which 
they  were  intended  of  old. 

*  I  Cor.   XV.  54,  55.  f  Hosea,  xiii.  14. 

X  Isa.  xxvi.  19  (cf.  vs.  14).         §  Ezek.   xxxvii. 


''DOUBLE  SENSE"  OF  SCRIPTURE.  265 

Do  these  instances  then  establish  the  existence 
of  "  the  double  sense  ?  "  Not  if  we  are  prepared 
to  admit  that  the  New  Testament  writers  may  have 
occasionally  simply  cited  the  familiar  language  of 
the  Old  Testament  when  its  words  expressed  what 
they  wished  to  say,  without  regard  to  the  original 
meaning  of  those  words.  This  method  of  citation 
was  spoken  of  in  the  lecture  on  Prophecy,  and  little 
more  need  now  be  said.  The  difficulty  is  felt  only 
in  cases  when  it  is  said  "  that  it  might  be  fulfilled 
which  was  spoken  by  the  prophet,"  or  some  similar 
formula  is  employed.  In  regard  to  these  it  is  first 
of  all  to  be  ascertained  what  this  formula,  as  used 
by  the  Evangelists,  was  really  intended  to  mean.  If 
we  are  to  understand  that  everything  which  hap- 
pened "•  in  order  that  the  Scriptures  might  be  ful- 
filled "  took  place  for  that  express  reason,  then  we 
shall  be  driven  to  the  conclusion  that  our  Lord's 
birth  of  a  virgin,*  nay  even  his  crucifixion,f  occurred 
because  it  had  been  so  foretold  ;  but  surely  the 
Scripture  itself  gives  us  higher  and  weightier  reasons 
why  these  things  should  have  been,  and  we  recog- 
nize that  these  great  events  themselves  were  origi- 
nally fixed  in  the  Divine  plan  for  the  salvation  of 
man,  and  then,  because  they  were  fixed,  the  prophe- 
cies were  given  to  foreshadow  them.  When,  with 
this  understanding,  we  go  back  to  our  formula,  it 
becomes  equivalent  to  the  statement, ''  and  so,  in  the 
Divine  plan,  that  came  to  pass  which  had  been  fore- 
told." And  such  interpretation  is  but  in  accordance 
with  the  general  softening  in  the  sense  of  the  illative 

*  Matt.  i.  23.         f  Matt.  xxvi.  56  ;  Jno.  xix.  24,  28,  36,  &c. 


266  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS, 

particle  {iva'^^  which  has  taken  place  in  the  New 
Testament  and  still  more  in  later  Greek.  It  is  im- 
possible in  many  cases  to  suppose  that  the  ground 
and  reason  of  the  events  of  the  Gospel  was  the 
accomplishment  of  what  had  been  predicted — that 
they  took  place,  literally,  in  order  that  the  prophe- 
cies might  be  fulfilled,  although  this  formula  may  be 
used  in  citing  them.  It  must  be  interpreted,  as  all 
other  language  is  interpreted,  according  to  usage 
and  the  manifest  intention  of  the  writer. 

This  fact  being  recognized,  there  is  no  longer  any 
difficulty  in  understanding  the  use  of  the  same  form- 
ula in  the  citation  of  passages  which  were  not  proph- 
ecies, but  which  are  merely  expressed  in  language 
fitly  applicable  to  the  event  narrated.  In  the  one 
case  as  in  the  other,  it  may  properly  be  said,  "  so 
the  words  uttered  of  old  have  come  true,  or  are  ful- 
filled." It  will  remain  then  to  distinguish  the  true 
prophecy  from  the  mere  application  of  language,  not 
by  the  form  of  quotation,  but  by  the  matter  quoted. 
If  follows  from  this  that  there  is  no  necessity  of  sup- 
posing a  "  double  sense  "  of  the  Scriptures  on  account 
of  the  quotations  made  from  them.  It  is  still  to  be 
determined  whether — this  supposed  necessity  being 
set  aside — there  is  reason  on  other  grounds  to  admit 
the  existence  of  such  a  sense.  The  two  opposite 
views  taken  of  the  matter  have  been  involved  in 
what  has  been  already  said:  (i)  The  first  is  that 
many  prophecies,  at  least,  and  it  would  seem  by 
parity  of  reason,  other  Scriptures  also,  has  a  two- 

*  On  the  use  of  this  particle  in  the  New  Testament,  see  Buttmann's 
N.  Test.  Grammar. 


" DOUBLE  SENSE     OF  SCRIPTURE.  267 

fold  sense ;  a  primary  and  a  secondary,  or,  a  literal 
and  a  mystical.  The  former  is  apparent,  and  may 
be  called  the  natural  meaning ;  the  other  does  not 
seem  to  be  conveyed  at  all  by  the  words  in  their 
connection,  but  is  supposed  to  inhere  in  the  isolated 
words  themselves  applied  to  some  different  matter. 
(2)  The  opposite  view  is,  that  since  the  former  is  in- 
admissible, because  it  exposes  Scripture  to  most 
arbitrary  interpretation  and  makes  it  utterly  unlike 
anything  else  of  which  we  have  knowledge ;  there- 
fore, prophecy  can  have  but  one  definite  meaning 
and  application,  and  when  its  words  are  applied  in 
the  New  Testament  in  any  other  'way,  it  can  only 
be  by  what  is  called  "  accommodation."  Neither 
of  these  views  is  in  itself  correct ;  yet,  in  considering 
them,  the  true  view  will  come  to  light. 

In  favor  of  the  "  double  sense  "  it  is  urged  that 
"  the  same  prophecies  frequently  refer  to  different 
events,  the  one  near  and  the  other  remote — the  one 
temporal,  the  other  spiritual,  and,  perhaps,  eternal ; 
that  the  expressions  are  partly  applicable  to  one  and 
partly  to  another;  and  that  what  has  not  been  ful- 
filled in  the  first,  we  must  apply  to  the  second."  * 
That  there  is  a  certain  truth  in  this  statement  has 
abundantly  appeared  both  in  what  has  been  said  of 
prophecy  and  in  the  treatment  of  types;  but  the 
truth  is  not  that  which  establishes  a  double  sense. 
A  prophecy  may  relate  to  more  than  one  thing,  nay, 
it  may  relate  both  to  temporal  and  spiritual  things, 
and  yet  have  but  one  sense.  When  it  was  foretold 
by  Jeremiah,  f  "  David  shall  never  want  a  man  to 

*  See  Fairbairn,  ubi  supra,  p.  105.  f  Jer.  xxxiii.  17,  18. 


268  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

sit  upon  the  throne  of  the  house  of  Israel ;  neither 
shall  the  priests,  the  Levites,  want  a  man  before  me 
to  offer  burnt  offerings  and  to  kindle  meat  offerings 
and  to  do  sacrifice  continually,"  the  direct  and  im- 
mediate sense  was  plain  that  the  Davidic  throne 
should  not  cease,  nor  should  the  sacrificial  system 
fail;  and  this  was  probably  all  that  Jeremiah's  con- 
temporaries could  understand.  But  when  the  Gos- 
pel was  proclaimed,  and  it  was  made  known  that  all 
these  things  were  shadows,  now  absorbed  in  the 
higher  substance,  then  it  became  plain  that  these 
and  such-like  prophecies  must  have  their  fulfilment, 
not  in  another  and  a  different  sense,  but  in  the  same 
sense,  exalted  from  earthly  shadows  to  spiritual  re- 
alities. The  everlasting  King  upon  David's  throne, 
and  the  everlasting  Priest  of  the  true  sanctuary  must 
be  Christ,  and  this  had  been  repeatedly  intimated  in 
prophecy  itself,  and  is  repeatedly  insisted  upon  in 
the  interpretation  of  those  prophecies  in  the  New 
Testament.  This  presents  the  message  of  old,  not 
as  having  different  senses  relating  to  different  things, 
but  as  having  only  one  meaning — intended  to  have 
a  temporal  and  typical  application  until  the  time 
should  arrive  for  its  full,  spiritual  and  eternal  fulfil- 
ment. This  may  be  illustrated  by  any  precept  or 
law  which  is  always  one  and  the  same  in  its  mean- 
ing, but  which  has  manifold  applications.  Thus,  the 
prophet  Hosea,  in  speaking  of  God's  continued  but 
ineffectual  remonstrances  with  Israel,  declares,  *'  I 
desired  mercy  and  not  sacrifice,"  *  setting  forth  what 
is  required  for  acceptance  on  high.  Our  Lord  quotes 
*  Hos.  vi.  6  (cf.  Micah,  vi.  6-8). 


"DOUBLE  SENSE''  OF  SCRIPTURE.  269 

this  declaration  twice,  once  in  justification  of  His 
eating  with  "  publicans  and  sinners,"  *  and  once 
when  "his  disciples  were  an  hungered"  to  sustain 
them  in  having  plucked  and  eaten  ears  of  corn  on 
the  Sabbath. t  These  two  applications  differ  from 
each  other,  and  both  from  that  of  the  prophet  ;  but 
there  is  no  **  double  sense."  The  principle  is  the 
same  throughout  ;  it  is  only  brought  to  bear  on  dif- 
ferent subjects.  In  much  the  same  way  our  Lord's 
enunciation  of  the  general  law,  "  unto  every  one  that 
hath  shall  be  given,"  \  is  applied  immediately  and 
directly  to  spiritual  things  ;  but  it  is  easy  to  see  that 
this  principle  of  progressive  accumulation  is  the  uni- 
versal law  of  all  created  things.  To  whatever  we 
turn  it  is  true,  and  true  in  precisely  the  one  sense 
in  which  it  was  uttered,  though  we  may  apply  it  to 
an  endless  variety  of  things.  In  this  manifold  appli- 
cation of  Scripture  where  the  same  meaning  is  pre- 
served (though  often  necessarily  exalted  by  the 
subject  to  which  it  is  applied),  there  is  no  foundation 
for  attaching  to  its  words  different  senses  which  have 
no  connection  with  one  another. 

Nor  is  there  any  better  foundation  in  the  combi- 
nation of  prophecy  with  type.  This  has  been  suffi- 
ciently explained  in  the  treatment  of  typical  proph- 
ecies. What  is  said  of  the  type  in  its  typical  char- 
acter and  relations  has  a  further  application  to  the 
antitype,  but  not  a  different  sense. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  objections  to  the  theory  of 
a  double  sense  are  obvious  and  weighty.     The  first 

*  Matt.  ix.  10-13.  \  I^-  xii.  I,  2,  7. 

X  Matt.  xiii.  12  ;  xxv.  29  ;  Mark,  iv.  25  ;  Luke,  viii.  18. 


270  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

is,  that  if  Scripture  has  thus  different  meanings,  only 
one  of  which  can  be  gathered  from  the  passage  itself, 
then  we  can  never  be  certain  what  it  really  means  to 
teach.  The  Holy  Spirit  in  using  human  language 
to  convey  truth  to  the  minds  of  men  has  failed  to 
show  what  it  meant  to  convey,  and  the  inspired 
record,  the  very  source  and  well  of  truth,  becomes 
more  obscure  than  the  ordinary  writings  of  ordinary 
men.  In  the  second  place,  this  theory  destroys  the 
value  of  the  prophecies.  For  it  either  so  compli- 
cates their  meaning  as  to  leave  us  in  doubt  and  un- 
certainty as  to  their  proper  application  ;  or,  if  this  be 
avoided  by  making  them  so  general  and  comprehen- 
sive as  to  include  the  different  senses  proposed,  then 
they  are  incapable  of  any  close  and  specific  fulfil- 
ment, and  can  no  longer  be  used  in  proof  of  the 
Divine  foreknowledge  of  the  events  to  which  they 
relate.  They  become,  like  the  heathen  oracles,  am- 
biguous, only  to  be  understood  in  their  fufilment, 
and  that  fulfilment  equally  true,  whether  one  event 
or  its  opposite  occur.  Finally,  as  has  been  seen, 
there  are  really  no  examples  of  such  "  double  sense  " 
which  do  not  admit  of  a  better  explanation  without 
resort  to  this  theory. 

The  opposite  view,  that  prophecy  can  have  but  one 
definite  meaning  and  application,  and  therefore  can 
relate  to  but  one  definite  event,  is  also  inconsistent 
with  the  facts  in  the  case.  It  has  been  shown  that 
the  prophecies  in  the  Old  Testament  often  give  inti- 
mations of  a  "springing  and  germinant"  accomplish- 
ment, and  certainly  there  are  many  instances  in  the 
New  Testament  of  the  application  to  Christian  veri- 


''DOUBLE  SENSE"  OF  SCRIPTURE.  2/1 

ties  of  passages  which  yet  had  an  immediate  and 
direct  bearing  upon  the  shadows  of  old.  It  is  not 
necessary  to  add  to  the  abundant  examples  already 
given  of  this  ;  but  it  may  be  well  to  call  attention 
to  the  fact  that  many.of  the  prophecies  thus  inter- 
preted under  the  Gospel,  were  generally  so  under- 
stood by  the  Jewish  contemporaries  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament writers.  Thus,  for  example,  the  prophecy 
of  Balaam,  "There  shall  come  a  star  out  of  Jacob, 
and  a  sceptre  shall  rise  out  of  Israel,  and  shall  smite 
the  corners  of  Moab,"*  etc.  certainly  received  a 
marked  temporal  and  literal  fulfilment  in  the  reign  of 
Solomon  and  of  some  of  his  successors,  and  notably 
under  the  Maccabean  dynasty,  when  John  Hyrcanus 
compelled  the  Idumeans  to  accept  circumcision  and 
become  incorporated  with  Jewish  people.  Yet  the 
Hebrew  students  of  the  Old  Testament  saw  that  the 
meaning  of  this  prophecy  was  not  yet  exhausted, 
and  even  the  comparatively  literal  Targum  of  Onke- 
los  translates,  "  when  a  king  shall  arise  from  the  house 
of  Jacob,  and  Messiah  shall  be  anointed  from  the 
house  of  Israel." 

The  solution  of  the  difficulty,  therefore,  is  to  be 
found  mainly  in  these  two  things:  (i)  In  the  fre- 
quent character  of  prophecy  as  looking  forward  not 
simply  to  a  single  event  or  person,  but  to  a  series 
in  the  same  line  of  progressive  fulfilment,  having 
therefore  always  the  same  sense,  but  with  a  manifold 
application ;  and  (2)  in  the  combination  of  type 
with  prophecy,  so  that  what  is  said  of  the  type  in 

*  Num.  xxiv.  17,  18. 


2/2  THE   OLD  AXD   NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

its  typical  character  becomes  necessarily  prophetic 
of  the  antitype. 

It  will  be  observed  that  in  this  solution  a  certain 
amount  of  truth  is  allowed  to  the  expression 
"  double  sense ;  "  that  is,  there  is  a  full  admission 
of  a  manifold  application  of  one  and  the  same 
sense,  and  this  from  one  point  of  view  might  be 
called  a  manifold  sense.  But  what  is  denied,  and 
emphatically  denied,  is  an  ambiguous  sense  ;  one 
sense  apparent  in  the  natural  meaning  of  the  utter- 
ance, and  another  relating  to  a  different  matter  so 
concealed  in  the  mere  words  that  its  existence  could 
not  be  suspected. 

It  will  still  remain  that  there  are  a  few  quotations 
in  the  New  Testament  from  the  Old  which  do  not 
thus  receive  an  intelligible  explanation.  It  is  from 
these  that  the  theory  of  "the  double  sense"  has 
been  built  up.  They  clearly  mean  one  thing  in  the 
Old  Testament,  and  they  are  clearly  used  in  refer- 
ence to  another  in  the  New ;  there  is  no  relation  of 
type  and  antitype  between  them,  and  there  is  no 
common  truth  taught  in  them,  and  no  common 
principle  brought  out  by  means  of  them.  Such 
passages  are  never  used  in  argument,  never  cited  to 
establish  Christian  truth,  or  to  prove  the  Divine 
foreknowledge.  They  are  sometimes  introduced 
without  any  formula  of  quotation  at  all,  so  that  we 
should  not  know  them  for  quotations  except  by  the 
coincidence  of  language  ;  they  are  sometimes  pre- 
faced by  the  simple  statement  '*  as  it  is  written,"  or 
even  by  the  fuller  formula  "  that  it  might  be  fulfilled 
which  was  spoken."     The  extremest  instance  of  the 


''DOUBLE  SENSE"  OF  SCRIPTURE,  273 

last  is  that  of  St.  Matthew's  citation  from  Jeremiah 
and  application  of  it  to  the  slaughter  of  the  infants. 
To  my  mind  this  is  simply  an  application.  I  do 
not  understand  St.  Matthew  to  say  that  Jeremiah 
had  any  such  meaning,  that  this  double  sense  lay 
unsuspected  in  the  words  he  used  in  reference  to  a 
totally  different  matter  ;  but  that  those  words,  taken 
apart  from  their  original  meaning,  'aptly  described 
what  occurred,  and  so  they  again  came  true  or  were 
fulfilled.  Why  the  New  Testament  writers  alone 
should  be  entirely  excluded  from  such  a  common 
method  of  using  the  language  of  Scripture,  and  one 
which  was  especially  the  habit  of  their  contempo- 
raries, it  is  hard  to  see.  With  our  exact  customs  of 
citation  by  chapter  and  verse,  and  with  careful  ex- 
amination of  the  original  it  is  less  common  ;  but 
even  yet  one  cannot  hear  many  sermons  without 
listening  to  such  quotations,  and  one  cannot  read 
much  patristic  literature,  or  literature  of  any  age 
in  which  scriptural  language  was  familiar  to  the 
writers,  notably  that  of  two  centuries  ago,  without 
meeting  them  abundantly.  They  are  the  natural 
expression  of  human  thought  when  that  thought 
has  been  trained  and  moulded  by  scriptural  phrase- 
ology. The  New  Testament  writers  were  certainly 
so  trained,  and  if  the  effect  of  that  training  was  the 
same  upon  them  as  upon  all  other  men,  there  re- 
mains no  foundation  for  the  theory  of  **  the  double 
sense  ; "  and  this  theory  is  encumbered  by  so  many 
and  such  grave  objections  that  it  can  only  be  ad- 
mitted on  the  most  convincing  proof  of  its  necessity. 


18 


LECTURE  XIII. 

THE     NEW    TESTAMENT    TESTIMONY     TO     THE    AU- 
THORSHIP OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  BOOKS. 

This  subject  is  one  of  considerable  interest  and 
importance  in  connection  with  the  relations  between 
the  Old  and  New  Testaments;  but  one  which  has 
drawn  out  the  most  contradictory  opinions.  On 
the  one  hand,  it  has  been  alleged  that  every  quota- 
tion from  the  Old  Testament  made  by  the  writers  of 
the  New,  fully  establishes  the  integrity  of  the  book 
from  which  the  citation  is  made,  and  also  its  au- 
thorship as  commonly  accepted  at  the  time;  and  on 
the  other  hand,  it  is  maintained  that  the  New  Testa- 
ment writers  and  speakers,  including  our  Lord,  mere- 
ly quote  the  older  Scriptures  as  the  sacred  books 
of  their  people,  without  in  the  least  meaning  to  de- 
termine any  critical  questions  in  regard  to  them. 
When  they  mention  the  name  of  the  Author,  they 
only  refer  to  the  book,  it  is  alleged,  under  its  com- 
mon title,  without  intending  to  pronounce  upon  the 
correctness  of  that  designation.  In  favor  of  the 
latter  view  it  is  urged  that  this  is  the  common  cus- 
tom of  all  times ;  even  now,  one  quotes  from 
Homer  or  from  a  disputed  play  of  Shakespeare, 
when  the  authorship  is  immaterial  to  his  purpose, 
although  he  may  himself  reject  the  imputed  author- 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY.        2/5 

ship  of  the  passage  cited.  If  this  is  done  in  so 
critical  and  careful  an  age  as  our  own,  it  certainly 
would  have  been  done  also  in  the  first  century  of 
the  Christian  era. 

Before  discussing  these  opposite  opinions  it  will 
be  well  to  have  the  unquestioned  facts  in  the  case 
distinctly  before  us.  There  are  many  allusions  in 
the  New  Testament  to  events  or  characters  of  the 
Old,  and  also  many  phrases  are  used  which  may  be 
found  in  the  ancient  Scriptures,  which  yet  are  not 
quotations  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word.  The 
number  of  these  is  variously  estimated  by  different 
writers,  but  is  certainly  large.  They  are  of  great 
value  in  the  discussion  of  the  canonicity  and  author- 
ity of  those  books  ;  but  may  here  be  left  out  of  con- 
sideration. There  are  also  many  distinct  quotations 
made  without  the  mention  of  the  author,  the  form- 
ulas used  being  "the  Scripture  saith,"  or  *;  the  Spirit 
witnesseth,"  and  such  like.  It  may  seem  that  these 
also  should  be  excluded  from  the  discussion  ;  but 
before  doing  so,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  this  habit  of 
quoting  simply  from  recognized  Scripture,  without 
mention  of  the  human  author,  gives  a  certain  em- 
phasis to  that  mention  in  instances  where  it  does 
occur.  When  it  was  so  customary  to  quote  Scrip- 
ture simply  as  Scripture,  we  are  not  at  liberty  to 
consider  it  a  mere  chance  that  sometimes  the  name 
of  the  author  was  mentioned.  The  writer  need  not 
have  mentioned  it.  Either  the  name  of  the  author 
was  of  some  importance  to  his  quotation,  and  then 
the  mention  of  his  name  becomes  a  distinct  testi- 
mony to   his   authorship ;    or  else  that  authorship 


2^6         THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS. 

was  SO  well  known  and  generally  accepted  among 
his  contemporaries  that  it  made  little  difference 
whether  the  name  was  given  or  not.  In  this  latter 
case  the  evidence  is  conclusive  of  the  general  ac- 
ceptance at  the  time  of  the  reputed  authorship,  the 
author  being  indifferently  mentioned  or  not  men- 
tioned. The  argument  that  the  New  Testament 
simply  accommodates  itself  in  these  matters  to  the 
popular  opinion  of  the  time  will  be  considered  fur- 
ther on.  There  are  also  a  small  number  of  quota- 
tions in  which  no  name  is  mentioned,  but  in  which 
the  circumstances  clearly  indicate  that  the  writer  or 
speaker  accepted  the  commonly  received  author- 
ship. Such  passages  will  be  considered  in  connec- 
tion with  those  in  which  the  author  is  named. 
With  this  exception  we  have  only  to  consider  quo- 
tations in  which  the  name  of  the  author  is  expressly 
mentioned. 

It  may  be  admitted  at  the  outset  that  the  finding 
of  a  quotation  in  a  book  now  bearing  the  name  of 
the  author  mentioned,  is  not  sufficient  proof  that 
the  writer  either  quoted  the  passage  from  this  book 
or  attributed  it  to  that  reputed  author,  unless  it  can 
be  shown  with  reasonable  probability  that  such  book 
was  in  existence  and  commonly  attributed  to  that 
author  at  the  time.  For  example  :  St.  Jude  quotes 
a  prophecy  of  Enoch,*  and  there  is  a  book  bearing 
the  name  of  ''  the  Book  of  Enoch  "  which  contains 
substantially  the  same  passage.  It  has  been  fre- 
quently assumed  that  St.  Jude  quotes  this  book,  and 
this  has  even  been  made  a  classical  example  in  the 

*  Jude,  14, 15- 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY.        2// 

discussion  of  the  present  subject.  But  the  evidence 
is  wanting  that  this  book,  in  its  present  form,  was  in 
existence  at  the  time  when  the  epistle  was  written. 
The  date  of  the  book,  as  a  whole,  is  variously  esti- 
mated by  critical  scholars  from  the  middle  of  the 
second  century  before  Christ  to  the  middle  of  the 
second  century  after.  Those,  however,  who  hold  to 
the  earlier  date  considers  that  it  contains  "  Christian 
interpolations,"  or  that  "  its  material  has  apparently 
been  used  in  the  composition  of  the  Apocalypse." 
If  the  former  view  be  accepted,  the  latter  may  be 
set  aside  as  altogether  gratuitous.  The  original 
date  of  the  book  is  of  little  consequence  ;  whatever 
earlier  germs  and  fragments  it  may  contain,  it  must 
have  been  worked  over  in  post-Christian  times,  and 
if  so,  would  certainly  have  introduced,  if  it  did  not 
already  contain,  the  prophecy  authenticated  by  St. 
Jude.  But  admit,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  that  the 
work  did  originally  contain  the  prophecy  in  ques- 
tion ;  whence  was  it  derived?  Certainly  not  from 
revelation  ;  for  the  book  is  undoubtedly  apocryphal. 
It  must  have  come  either  from  the  imagination  of 
the  writer,  which  is  unlikely,  or  else  it  must  have 
been  derived  from  tradition.  The  latter  supposition 
would  be  universally  accepted,  especially  as  the 
form  of  the  language  indicates  long  oral  transmis- 
sion. Why  then  should  not  St.  Jude  have  taken  it 
from  the  same  source?  There  are  many  such  tra- 
ditions preserved  in  the  New  Testament.  St.  Paul 
mentions  Jannes  and  Jambres  as  the  names  of  the 
magicians  who  withstood   Moses  ;  *  the  Epistle  to 

*2  Tim.  iii.  8. 


2/8  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS, 

the  Hebrews  records  that  at  the  Mount,  Moses  said,- 
''  I  exceedingly  fear  and  quake  ;  "*  St.  Stephen  gives 
the  age  of  Moses  at  his  flight  to  Midian  ;t  St.  Paul 
states  the  length  of  the  reign  of  Saul.:^  Whatever 
degree  of  authority  may  be  attached  by  any  one  to 
these  utterances,  unless  they  were  especial  revela- 
tions, they  must  have  been  derived  from  tradition. 
It  is  plain  that  only  a  very  small  part^  of  all  the 
things  said  and  done  during  the  ages  of  Israel's  his- 
tory could  have  been  recorded  in  the  books  of 
Scripture.  Multitudes  of  others  must  have  been 
traditionally  preserved  for  a  time,  and  these  tradi- 
tions, in  the  natural  course  of  things,  would  either 
have  ultimately  faded  away,  or  else  have  become 
overlaid  with  a  mass  of  untrustworthy  legend. 
Such  items  of  these  traditions  as  the  inspired 
writers  recognized  as  true  and  had  occasion  to  use, 
they  have  sent  forth  stamped  with  their  authority ; 
but  there  is  no  more  reason  to  suppose  that  in  doing 
so,  St.  Jude  quoted  from  the  Book  of  Enoch,  than 
that  St.  Paul  quoted,  in  his  address  to  the  elders  of 
Ephesus,  "  It  is  more  blessed  to  give  than  to  re- 
ceive," §  from  some  apocryphal  gospel  which  con- 
tained the  saying.  It  seems  therefore  sufficiently 
clear  that  as  the  author  of  the  Book  of  Enoch  must 
have  quoted  a  traditional  saying,  so  also  St.  Jude 
derived  his  quotation  directly  from  the  same  source, 
and  not  indirectly,  through  the  medium  of  that 
book.  This  seems  the  just  view  of  the  matter  in- 
dependently of  the  question  of  the  date  of  the  Book 

*Heb.  xii.  21.  f  Acts,  vii.  23. 

X  lb.  xiii.  21.  §  lb,  XX.  35. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY.        279 

of  Enoch  ;  but,  of  course,  if  that  book  is  post-Chris- 
tian, wholly  or  partly,  the  question  is  settled  out  of 
hand.  We  may  then  meet  the  argument  drawn 
from  this  quotation  by  a  denial  of  its  existence,  and 
need  not  further  consider  the  extended  inferences 
based  upon  it. 

There  are  one  or  two  other  passages  appealed  to 
on  behalf  of,  the  same  views  which  will  be  considered 
in  their  order.  The  extreme  view  on  the  other 
side,  that  every  quotation  from  an  ancient  book, 
whether  the  author  is  mentioned  or  not,  authenti- 
cates that  book  as  the  production  of  the  writer  under 
whose  name  it  was  commonly  quoted  at  the  time, 
scarcely  needs  serious  refutation.  There  are  many 
quotations  from  the  Book  of  Proverbs,  for  example, 
and  that  book  was  commonly  quoted  as  Solomon's, 
as  it  is  still ;  yet  the  book  itself  expressly  testifies 
that  all  beyond  the  twenty-fourth  chapter  was  of 
later  compilation.  The  two  Books  of  Samuel  were 
probably  popularly  quoted  as  the  work  of  that 
prophet ;  but  his  death  is  recorded  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  twenty-fifth  chapter  of  the  first  book. 
The  last  chapter  of  Deuteronomy  is  certainly  not 
shown  by  quotations  from  the  earlier  chapters  to 
have  been  written  by  Moses,  however  justly  he  is 
considered  the  author  of  the  Pentateuch  as  a  whole. 

In  treating  of  the  value  of  the  New  Testament 
testimony  to  the  authorship  of  the  books  cited  by 
name,  it  may  be  well  to  take  up  first  a  few  clear 
cases  in  which  the  alleged  authorship  is  essential  to 
the  argument  in  support  of  which  the  passage  is 
cited.     Our  Lord  confounded  His  Jewish  adversa- 


280  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

ries  by  the  question  in  regard  to  the  language  of  the 
Messianic  Psalm  ex.,  ''  How  then  doth  David  call 
him  Lord  ?  "  *  Here  the  whole  difficulty  consisted  in 
the  fact  that  the  Messiah  was  descended  after  the 
flesh  from  David,  and  that  it  was  David  who  used 
these  words  concerning  Him.  Here  then  this  par- 
ticular Psalm  is  unquestionably  attributed  to  David 
by  Christ,  and  there  would  otherwise  be  no  validity 
in  His  argument.  It  is  alleged,  however,  that  this 
only  shows  that  the  Psalm  was  attributed  to  David 
by  the  Jews,  and  that  the  argument  of  our  Lord  was 
a  mere  argiimeiitum  ad  homi7iem^  having  no  force  in 
itself,  but  satisfactory  to  them  on  account  of  their 
opinions  in  the  matter.  Even  so,  the  presumptive 
evidence  would  be  in  favor  of  the  Davidic  author- 
ship, and  the  burden  of  proof  must  rest  upon  those 
by  whom  this  is  denied.  But  it  would  be  going 
very  far  to  admit  this  position.  It  was  during  the 
last  days  of  our  Lord's  life  on  earth.  The  Jews  had 
been  foiled  in  their  utmost  efforts  to  entrap  Him  in 
difficulty,  and  He  now  turns  upon  them  with  a  ques- 
tion about  an  acknowledged  prophecy  of  the  Mes- 
siah. He  claimed  to  be  that  Messiah,  and  they 
rejected  Him  because  He  did  not  conform  to  their 
ideas  of  what  the  Messiah  should  be ;  therefore  He 
showed  them,  so  clearly  as  to  draw  out  a  confession 
of  their  ignorance,  that  they  did  not  understand  this 
prophecy  of  the  Messiah.  It  is  exceedingly  difficult 
to  suppose  that  in  doing  this  He  would  have  used 
an  unsound  argument,  however  effective  upon  them  ; 
and   if  the   argument  be  sound,  then  we  have  here 

*  Ps.  ex.  i;  Matt.  xxii.  43,  45;  Mark,  xii.  36,  37;  Luke,  xx.  42,  44. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY.        28 1 

our  Lord's  express  testimony  to  the  Davidic  author- 
ship of  Psalm  ex. 

In  the  speech  of  St.  Peter  upon  the  day  of  Pen- 
tecost he  quotes  from  two  of  the  Psalms,"^  attrib- 
uting both  to  David,  the  Davidic  authorship  of  one 
at  least  of  them  being  necessary  to  the  validity  of 
His  argument.  His  argument  might  indeed  hold 
even  if  the  Psalm  just  mentioned,  the  ex.,  were  not  by 
David,  for  when  he  says,  "  David  is  not  yet  ascended 
into  the  heavens,"  f  the  same  thing  would  be  true  of 
any  other  human  author.  This,  then,  may  be  taken 
simply  as  a  citation  mentioning  the  name  of  the  au- 
thor, only  that  in  this  case  we  happen  to  know, 
from  the  testimony  of  our  Lord,  that  the  author  is 
rightly  named.  His  other  quotation  is  from  Psalm 
xvi.,  and  it  is  plain  that  St.  Peter  attributed  it  to 
David,  and  he  bases  an  extended  argument  upon  the 
fact  that  it  was  written  by  him. J 

Here  are  two  clear  instances  of  New  Testament 
quotations  from  the  Old  (by  the  mouth  of  our  Lord 
and  of  St.  Peter),  giving  the  name  of  the  author,  and 
it  is  clear  that  in  both  the  authorship,  which  was 
that  commonly  received,  is  given  in  the  full  convic- 
tion that  it  was  right  and  true.  Certainly  the  pre- 
sumption must  be  that  it  is  so  in  other  cases  also, 
unless  something  can  be  shown  to  the  contrary.  In 
other  words,  it  must  be  assumed  that  the  authors 
mentioned  in  the  New  Testament  are  rightly  men- 
tioned, and  hence  that  this  testimony  is  conclusive 
as  to  the  opinion  of  these  inspired  writers,  unless  in- 

*  Acts,  ii.  25,  34.  t  Acts.  ii.  34  ;  Ps.  ex,  i. 

%  Ps.  xvi.  7-10 ;   Acts,  ii.  25-31. 


282 


THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 


stances  can  be  brought  forward  in  which  they  have 
given  the  authorship  wrongly.  The  onus  probandi 
rests  on  that  side. 

Before  going  further  it  will  be  well  to  state  the 
books  which  are  actually  cited  with  the  author's 
name.  These  are  Exodus,  Leviticus,  and  Deuter- 
onomy under  the  name  of  Moses  ;  a  number  of  the 
Psalms  under  the  name  of  David,*  being  in  every 
case  Psalms  which  by  their  title  are  attributed  to 
David,  except  the  anonymous  Psalms  ii.  and  xcv. ; 
Isaiah  (the  latter  as  well  as  the  former  part) ;  Jere- 
miah ;  Daniel ;  Hosea  ;  and  Joel.  They  constitute 
only  about  forty  out  of  many  hundred  citations  from 
the  Old  Testament,  and  show  that  the  mention  of 
the  author's  name  in  making  a  quotation  was,  to  say 
the  least,  not  the  ordinary  custom,  and  is  therefore 
somehow  to  be  accounted  for.f 


*  Ps.  ii.,  xvi.,  xxxii.,  Ixix.,  xcv.,  cix.,  ex. 

f  The  following  table  is  taken  from  an  essay  on  "  The  New  Testa- 
ment witness  to  the  Authorship  of  the  Old  Testament  Books,"  by- 
Prof.  Francis  Brown,  in  the  Journal  of  the  Society  of  Biblical  Litera- 
ture and  Exegesis  for  Dec,  1882.  The  doubtful  quotation  from 
Samuel  is  treated  of  in  the  text. 


Genesis 

is 

cited  28  times 

Exodus 

ii 

(( 

33     " 

Leviticus 

ii 

(< 

12     " 

Deuteronomy 

li 

(( 

41     " 

I  &  2  Samuel 

a 

ii 

3(?)" 

I  Kings 

ii 

ii 

2     ♦* 

Job 

ii 

ii 

I     " 

Psalms 

ii 

a 

68     '' 

Proverbs 

ii 

a 

6     " 

Ecclesiastes 

a 

ii 

I     " 

Isaiah 

ii 

a 

61     «* 

-  Moses 

name 

0 

time. 

(( 

ii 

2 

times. 

ii 

ii 

I 

ii 

ii 

7 

Samuel's 

(?)- 

I 

Author's 

ii 

0 

(( 

ii 

0 

David's 

it 

10 

Author's 

n 

0 

(( 

ii 

0 

Isaiah's 

<' 

17 

THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY. 


283 


We  may  now  take  up  the  instances  alleged  to  show 
that  the  New  Testament  writers  gave  the  names  of 
the  authors  of  their  quotations  loosely  and  without 
intending  to  commit  themselves  to  the  truthfulness 
of  the  authorship.  It  is  not  to  be  denied  that  some 
of  these  present  difficulties  ;  but,  I  think,  the  diffi- 
culties are  not  of  a  kind  to  favor  the  view  in  support 
of  which  they  are  brought  forward. 

The  stock  example  of  St.  Jude  and  the  Book  of 
Enoch  has  already  been  sufficiently  considered,  and 
really  has  no  bearing  upon  the  question. 

The  next  instance  cited  is  the  statement  of  St. 
Peter,  "  all  the  prophets  from  Samuel  and  those 
that  follow  after,  as  many  as  have  spoken,  have 
likewise  foretold  of  these  days."*  I  suppose  this 
to  be  a  general  statement  that  the  purpose  of  the 
whole  body  of  ancient  prophecy  was  to  point  for- 
ward to  the  Messianic  kingdom.  It  may  be  com- 
pared to  the  statement  in  the  first  Epistle  of  St. 
Peter,  "of  which  salvation  the  prophets  have  in- 
quired and  searched  diligently,  who  prophesied  of 
the  grace  that  should  come  unto  you,"  etc. ;  f  or  to 


Jeremiah       i 

s  cited 

7(?) 

times. 

Under 

Jeremiah's   name  2  times. 

[Daniel 

< 

I 

( 

Daniel's         " 

I     -    ] 

Hosea            ' 

( 

6 

(( 

Hosea's          " 

I     " 

Joel 

( 

2 

i 

Joel's 

I     " 

Amos             ' 

(( 

2 

" 

Amos's           " 

0     " 

Micah            * 

• 

r 

I 

Micah's 

0     " 

Habbakuk     ' 

( 

4 

' 

Habbakuk's  " 

0     " 

Haggai          ' 

< 

I 

' 

Haggai's 

0     ** 

Zechariah      ' 

< 

6 

( 

Zechariah's   ** 

0     " 

Malachi         * 

( 

5 

(« 

Malachi's      " 

0     "     " 

*  Acts,  iii. 

24. 

t  I  Pet.  i. 

10. 

284  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

the  record  of  St.  Luke  that,  while  our  Lord  was  on 
the  way  to  Emmaus  with  the  disciples,  "'  beginning 
at  Moses  and  all  the-  prophets,  He  expounded  unto 
them  in  all  the  Scriptures  the  things  concerning 
Himself;""^  or  to  the  statement  of  St.  Paul  before 
Agrippa,  that  he  witnessed  '*  none  other  things  than 
those  which  the  prophets  and  Moses  did  say  should 
come  :  that  Christ  should  suffer,  and  that  he  should 
be  the  first  that  should  rise  from  the  dead,  and  should 
show  light  unto  the  people  and  to  the  Gentiles.f  " 
In  all  these  cases  alike  there  is  expressed  the  same 
view  of  the  object  of  the  whole  body  of  Old  Testa- 
ment Scripture  :  that  it  was  intended  to  prepare  and 
lead  forward  to  Christ ;  and  in  this  particular  in- 
stance Samuel's  name  is  mentioned  merely  as  the 
first  chronologically  in  the  long  line  of  prophets 
distinctly  so  called.  His  work  in  the  reorganiza- 
tion of  the  disordered  tribes,  in  the  restoration  of 
the  neglected  worship  of  Jehovah,  in  the  anointing 
and  subsequent  setting  aside  of  the  first  king  of 
Israel,  and  anointing  in  his  place  "  a  man  after 
God's  own  heart,"  and  all  his  teaching  accompany- 
ing these  acts,  was  in  preparation  for  the  fulfillment 
of  the  promise  of  the  Great  Deliverer  and  King. 
It  was  to  the  Messianic  kingdom  that  all  his  words 
and  works  looked  forward.  When  that  kingdom 
had  come,  the  disciples  rightly  considered  that 
Samuel,  in  common  with  those  that  followed,  had 

*  Luke,  xxiv.  27. 

f  Acts,  xxvi.  22,  23.  The  translation  of  the  Revisers  here  is  per- 
haps more  accurate  and  certainly  brings  out  better  the  point :  "  that 
He  first  by  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  should  proclaim,"  etc. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY.        285 

"  foretold  these  days"  in  making  them  the  end  and 
object  of  their  whole  life-work.  That  this  is  really 
what  St.  Peter  meant  to  say  is  abundantly  evident 
from  the  fact  that  he  expressly  includes  "  all  the 
prophets  "  in  the  same  category  with  Samuel,  and 
yet  of  many  of  them,  as  of  Elijah,  Elisha,  Nahum, 
and  others,  we  have  no  distinct  Messianic  proph- 
ecy recorded.  Why  should  his  words  be  inter- 
preted in  a  different  way  of  Samuel  from  that  in 
which  they  must  be  of  many  of  the  others? 

But  the  critics  will  have  it  that  St.  Peter  must 
refer  to  some  'specific  prophecy  in  words,  and  as  it 
is  alleged  that  none  was  uttered,  at  least  so  far  as 
the  record  .goes,  by  Samuel  himself,  the  reference 
must  be  to  the  "  Book  of  Samuel  "  which  contains 
the  prophecy  of  Nathan  spoken  to  David,*  **  the 
one  great  Messianic  prophecy  of  the  Book."  But 
this  prophecy  was  uttered  many  years  after  the 
death  of  Samuel,  and  could  not  have  been  recorded 
by  him.  St.  Peter  therefore,  it  is  said,  cites  a  proph- 
ecy as  "  Samuel's,"  because  it  is  contained  in  a  book 
bearing  his  name,  although,  in  this  part  at  least,  not 
written  by  him.  Here,  then,  it  is  claimed,  is  a  dis- 
tinct case  of  the  citation  under  the  name  of  an 
author  of  something  which  was  not  written  by  him, 
just  as  now  when  we  cite  a  passage  as  "  in  Samuel" 
we  do  not  mean  "  in  the  book  which  Samuel  wrote," 
but  "■  in  the  book  which  commonly  bears  his  name." 

This  argument  rests  upon  several  assumptions, 
each  one  of  which  is  essential  to  its  force  and  none 
of  which  seem  in  themselves  probable.     In  the  first 

2  Sam.  vii.  12-16. 


286         THE  OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

place,  there  Is  no  evidence  that  our  present  Books  of 
Samuel  were  called  by  that  name  in  the  time  of  St. 
Peter ;  it  is  not  likely  that  they  were,  and,  if  not, 
the  whole  argument  falls  to  the  ground.  It  is  true 
that,  as  one  undivided  Bopk,  they  received  that 
name  in  the  time  of  the  Talmud  and  of  our  earliest 
Hebrew  manuscripts  ;  but  these  all  belong  to  a 
much  later  date.  In  the  Septuagint,  which  was  the 
translation  most  used  by  the  Apostles,  they  are 
called  the  first  and  second  Books  of  Kings.  It  is 
not  likely  that  the  writings  in  question  were  known 
as  the  "  Books  "  or  the  *'  Book  of  Samuel "  in  St. 
Peter's  day.  Further,  if  any  definite  prophecy 
must  be  understood,  there  is  no  necessity  for  sup- 
posing that  of  Nathan  to  be  meant.  The  reference 
might  well  be  to  the  song  of  Hannah  at  the  birth 
of  Samuel,*  the  close  of  which  is  generally  under- 
stood as  referring  to  the  Messiah,  and  is  so  inter- 
preted in  the  Chaldee  Targum  which  embodies  the 
current  Jewish  interpretation  in  the  time  of  St. 
Peter.  This  song  was  in  all  probability  recorded 
by  Samuel  himself.  But  finally,  as  already  shown 
at  length,  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  a  reference 
to  any  distinct  prophetic  utterance.  It  is  therefore 
quite  impossible  on  any  ground  to  consider  this  as 
a  proof  that  a  book  was  cited  under  the  name  of  an 
author  who  was  not  its  writer. 

The  next  instance  referred  to  is  that  of  Jeremiah, 
twice  cited  by  name  by  St.  Matthew.  The  point  for 
which  the  passages  are  adduced  is,  that  while  the 
first,  in  relation  to  Rachel's  weeping  for  her  children, 

*  I  Sam.  ii,-  lo. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY.        2?>y 

occurs  in  Jeremiah  substantially  as  it  is  quoted,* 
the  other,  in  relation  to  the  price  of  Judas'  treachery 
and  the  purchase  of  the  potter's  field,  with  the  price 
thereof,t  does  not  occur  at  all  in  Jeremiah,  but  a 
somewhat  similar  passage  is  found  in  Zechariah.  J 
Hence  it  is  argued  that  St.  Matthew  attributes  the 
words  of  Zechariah  to  Jeremiah,  and  therefore  that 
he  was  not  careful  about  the  authorship  of  his  quo- 
tations. A  great  variety  of  explanations  have  been 
suggested  to  account  for  this  discrepancy,  but  put- 
ting these  all  aside  for  the  moment,  and  taking  the 
case  just  as  it  is  stated,  it  argues  nothing  for  the 
theory  which  it  is  brought  to  support.  There  is  no 
variation  of  any  importance  in  the  reading,  and  it 
is  clear  that  the  Evangelist  attributes  to  Jeremiah 
a  passage  which  is  not  found  in  the  collection  of  his 
writings  as  we  have  them.  Now  vWiat  does  this 
prove?  No  one  would  maintain  that  St.  Matthew 
really  confused  in  his  mind  the  utterances  of  Zecha- 
riah with  those  of  Jeremiah,  since  he  must  have 
been  familiar  with  both  of  them.  At  the  utmost, 
it  was  a  mere  slip  of  the  pen,  or  of  memory  (so  St. 
Augustine,  Luther,  Beza,  Keil,  Kohler,  and  others 
hold)  ;  and  as  an  accidental  mistake  would  only 
show  that  such  mistakes  were  possible.  We  do  not 
admit  the  existence  of  these  mistakes  but  if  allowed 
here,  they  would  be  far  from  proving  that  the  New 
Testament  writers  were  in  the  habit  of  citing  au- 
thors without  reference  to  the  reality  of  their  author- 
ship.    To  sustain  the  theory  for  which  it  is  adduced 

*  Matt.  ii.  17-18  ;  Jer.  xxxi.  15.  f  Matt,  xxvii.  9. 

X  Zech.  xi.  12-13. 


288  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

it  would  be  necessary  to  show  that  this  part  of 
Zechariah  was  popularly  attributed  to  Jeremiah,  and 
that  St.  Matthew  cited  it  accordingly. 

Now  it  curiously  happens  that  one  of  the  chief 
efforts  of  modern  criticism  has  been  directed  to 
showing  that  this  part  of  Zechariah  was  really  the 
writing  of  some  earlier  prophet.  Mede  and  Arch- 
bishop Newcome  led  the  way  in  this  opinion,  and 
have  been  followed  by  a  host  of  writers  both  in 
England  and  on  the  Continent.  Among  these  are 
some  who  assign  Zechariah  ix.-xi.  to  Jeremiah,  and 
in  this  case  St.  Matthew  would  simply  have  stated 
an  actual  fact  which  modern  criticism  has  rediscov- 
ered. But,  without  admitting  the  validity  of  the 
argument  for  the  dismemberment  of  Zechariah,  it 
may  be  said  that  whatever  force  it  has  points  in  the 
direction  of  a  far  earlier  writer,  a  contemporary  of 
Isaiah,  and  the  critics  who  deny  the  authorship  of 
Zechariah  are  generally  agreed  in  this  earlier  date. 
The  explanation  of  the  difficulty  by  supposing 
Zechariah  ix.-xi.  to  have  been  actually  written  by 
Jeremiah  cannot  therefore  be  accepted,  nor  is  there 
the  slightest  evidence  that  any  such  opinion  was 
entertained  in  the  time  of  the  Evangelist. 

Others  (notably  Hengstenberg)  have  thought 
that  Zechariah  is  expressing  in  other  language  the 
substance  of  prophecies  of  Jeremiah,  and  that  St. 
Matthew,  using  the  thought  of  Jeremiah,  attributes 
the  prophecy  to  him,  although  citing  it  in  the  form 
given  to  it  by  Zechariah.  The  subtility  of  the 
argument  by  which  this  theory  is  maintained  is  suf- 
ficient to  show  its  inconsistency  with  the  simplicity 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY         289 

of  the  Evangelic  narrative,  nor  even  so  would  it 
meet  the  language,  "  that  which  was  spoken  by 
Jeremiah  the  prophet." 

The  first  point  to  be  decided  is  whether  St.  Mat- 
thew really  quotes  the  passage  of  Zechariah,  as  al- 
leged, and  if  not,  from  what  source  he  derived  the 
quotation.  Certainly,  if  he  quoted  from  Zechariah, 
he  quotes  the  passage  in  a  very  different  sense  from 
that  which  it  originally  bore.  The  whole  context 
shows  that  Zechariah  speaks  of  an  insufficient  re- 
ward for  the  faithful  but  unavailing  service  of  the 
prophet.  In  fact  there  is  nothing  to  assimilate  the 
two  passages  but  the  mention  of  the  thirty  pieces 
of  silver  and  the  casting  them  to  the  potter.  The 
former  is  so  slight  an  indication  that  the  supposi- 
tion of  St.  Matthew's  having  quoted  this  passage 
rests  chiefly  on  the  latter.  It  is  doubtful,  however, 
if  this  word  occurs  in  the  original.  As  the  text  k 
stands  the  word  is  1>T,  a  participle  meaning  literally 
the  former.  It  is  used  frequently  of  a  potter,  also 
of  a  maker  of  graven  images  of  wood,  stone,  or 
metal,*  and  of  God  as  the  Creator. f  In  the  pres- 
ent case  the  meaning  of  potter  is  unlikely,  since  it 
can  scarcely  be  supposed  that  potters  would  have 
been  allowed  within  the  temple.  A  change  of  the 
weak  initial  letter  makes  the  word  iViN  =  treasury, 
and  either  this  must  have  been  the  reading  of  the 
Septuagint  {ftirnace),  and  also  the  version  of  Sym- 
machus,  and  the  Chaldee  {chief  officer),  as  well  as 
of  the  Syriac  translations,  or  else  they  must  have 
understood  the  word  as  it  stands  in  that  sense.     St. 

*  Isa.  xliv.  q;  Heb.  ii.i8.  f  Jer.  x.  16;  xviii,  ii  ;  Amos,  iv.  13,  etc. 
19 


\ 


290  THE  OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

Matthew,  according  to  his  custom,  if  he  quoted 
from  Zechariah  at  all,  would  probably  have  quoted 
from  the  Septuagint  version,  and  it  is  only  neces- 
sary to  put  the  passage  from  the  Septuagint  side  by 
side  with  that  from  St.  Matthew  to  show  how  un- 
likely it  is  that  the  one  should  have  been  taken  from 
the  other. 

SEPTUAGINT.  ST.  MATTHEW. 

And  the  Lord  said   unto   me,         And  they  took  the  thirty  pieces 

Drop  them  into  the  furnace  and  of  silver,  the   price   of   him  that 

I  will  see  if  it  is  good  metal,  as  I  was   valued,    whom   they   of   the 

was  tested  for  their  sake.     And  I  children  of  Israel  did  value,  and 

took   the  thirty  pieces    of   silver  gave  them  for  the  potter's  field, 

and  threw  them  into  the  house  of  as  the  Lord  appointed  me. 
the  Lord,  into  the  furnace. 

If  these  same  passages  had  been  found  in  any 
two  profane  authors,  only  a  bold  conjecture  would 
establish  a  connection  between  them.  In  the  He- 
brew, if  the  translation  potter  be  retained,  there  is 
more  resemblance ;  but  still  the  passages  are  unlike. 
When  regard  is  had  to  the  dissimilarity  of  the  con- 
text and  the  purport  of  the  two  passages,  there  cer- 
tainly remains  slender  basis  for  the  theory  that  St. 
Matthew  here  quoted  Zechariah  under  the  name  of 
Jeremiah.  Whence  then  was  the  quotation  derived  ? 
In  the  opinion  of  so  early  and  critical  a  scholar  as 
Origen,  and  of  very  many  commentators  since  his 
day,  it  was  from  a  prophecy  of  Jeremiah  now  lost. 
Jeremiah  prophesied  in  the  last  days  of  the  king- 
dom of  Judah  and  after  its  overthrow  in  very 
troubled  times.  His  prophecies  were  uttered  partly 
in  Jerusalem,  partly  in  Egypt,  and  some  of  them 
were  sent  to  the  captives  in  Chaldea.     As  they  are 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY,        2gi 

collected  in  the  book  which  bears  his  name  they 
are  in  obvious  chronological  confusion,  and  there  is 
no  book  of  the  Old  Testament  in  which  the  Septua- 
gint  version  varies  so  greatly  from  the  Hebrew  both 
in  the  translation  and  in  the  order  of  the  latter  half 
of  the  book.  It  also  omits  a  number  of  passages. 
There  is  no  improbability  that  other  prophecies  of 
his  should  have  failed  to  be  included  in  this  collec- 
tion of  his  writings,  and  some  of  these  may  well 
have  been  preserved  to  the  time  of  the  Christian 
era  and  have  since  been  lost.  The  supposition  that 
St.  Matthew  really  quoted  from  a  prophecy  of  Jere- 
miah, now  lost,  has  much  in  its  favor;  while  the 
supposition  that  he  quoted  from  Zechariah  seems 
to  be  against  the  evidence.  But  however  the  diffi- 
culty may  be  explained,  there  is  surely  here  no 
trustworthy  support  for  the  theory  that  the  New 
Testament  writers,  when  they  gave  the  authority 
for  their  quotations,  used  the  names  of  the  popu- 
larly supposed  authors,  without  regard  to  accuracy. 
There  is  nothing  to  show  that  this  passage  of  Zech- 
ariah was  at  the  time  attributed  by  anybody  to 
Jeremiah. 

There  is  one,  and  only  one,  more  passage  which  is 
appealed  to  as  evidence  of  the  uncertainty  of  the  au- 
thorship assigned  in  the  New  Testament  to  some  of 
its  quotations.  It  is  at  the  opening  of  the  Gospel  of 
St.  Mark,*  and  is  the  only  quotation  which  that  Evan- 
gelist himself  makes  from  the  Old  Testament.  It 
is  made  up  of  two  passages,  the  first  from  Malachi,  f 
the  other  from  Isaiah,  j^     In  the  authorized  version 

*  Mark,  i.  2-3.  f  Mai.  iii.  i.  $Isa.  xl.3. 


292  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

there  is  no  difficulty,  for  the  quotations  are  prefaced 
by  the  words,  ''  As  it  is  written  by  the  prophets ;  " 
but,  although  this  is  the  reading  of  some  important 
manuscripts,  the  weight  of  authority  is  strongly  for 
the  reading,  ''  As  it  is  written  in  the  prophet 
Isaiah,"  which  is  adopted  by  all  the  critical  editors, 
and  which  called  for  explanation  as  early  as  the  time 
of  Origen.  As  the  passage  stands  therefore,  in  its 
correct  reading,^  St.  Mark  cites  Isaiah,  and  then 
proceeds  to  give,  first  a  passage  from  another 
prophet,  and  then  one  from  Isaiah  ;  and  hence  there 
seems  ground  for  the  conclusion  "  that  the  citation- 
formula  is  not  here  an  authoritative  guide  to  the 

*  The  evidence  for  the  different  readings  as  given  by  Griesbach, 
Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  and  Tregelles  is  as  follows  (Westcott  and 
Hort  have  not  thought  the  reading  of  the  Textus  Receptus  worthy  of 
a  special  note,  and  Scrivener  only  refers  to  it  as  an  instance  of  the 
copyist's  forsaking  "  his  proper  function  for  that  of  a  reviser,  or  criti- 
cal corrector  ")  ;  for  iv  rcJ  (there  is  some  variation  in  the  omission 
of  ro?)  'R6aicc  rep  npocprizy  the  uncials  )^B  D  LA  \  of  the  cursives 
33,  and  about  twenty  five  others  (besides  i  which  gives  both  read- 
ings) ;  of  the  versions,  Itala,  Vulgate,  Coptic,  the  Peshito  and  Jeru- 
salem Syriac,  and  the  margin  of  the  Harclean,  the  Gothic,  and  the 
Armenian  in  its  MSS. — nearly  all  these  being  earlier  than  any  MS. 
containing  the  other  reading  ;  of  the  Fathers,  Irenseus  in  different 
places  has  both  readings  and  notes  the  variation,  Origen  repeatedly 
and  in  an  express  quotation  saying  "that  Mark  has  collected  into 
one  two  prophecies  spoken  in  different  places  by  two  prophets," 
Porphyry,  as  quoted  by  St.  Jerome,  and  St.  Jerome  himself,  who 
thinks  that  the  name  of  Isaiah  is  an  error  of  the  scribes.  Eusebius 
also  is  of  the  same  opinion,  S.  Augustine,  and  many  others.  For 
the  reading  bv  roTi  Ttpocprjrai^  the  remaining  uncials  and  cursives, 
the  most  important  of  which  are  A  and  P  ;  of  the  versions  only  the 
^thiopic,  the  textoi  the  Harclean  Syriac  (7th  cent.),  the  Armenian 
in  the  printed  edition  of  Zohrab,  and  the  Arabic  ;  of  the  Fathers, 
Photius,  Theophylact,  and  Irenaeus  as  above. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY.        293 

real  authorship  of  the  words  which  immediately 
follow."  Various  explanations  have  been  suggested, 
from  the  time  of  Origen  down.  The  simplest  seems 
to  be  that  St.  Mark,  like  the  other  Synoptists,* 
originally  wrote  quoting  only  from  Isaiah ;  and  this 
is  the  more  likely,  inasmuch  as  his  Gospel  is  so  pecul- 
iarly restricted  to  what  is  mentioned  in  the  other 
Gospels,  and  so  especially  represents  what  must 
have  been  the  common  oral  teaching  about  our 
Lord's  life  and  works.  Afterwards  he  inserted  the 
passage  from  Malachi,  on  account  of  its  especial 
appropriateness,  but  neglected  to  put  with  it  the 
name  of  the  author.  Much  to  the  same  effect  is 
another  explanation :  that  he  originally  wrote  the 
two  quotations  as  we  have  them,  but  that  he  thought 
chiefly  of  Isaiah,  as  the  prophecy  commonly  used 
in  the  Christian  teaching,  and  gave  his  name,  and 
then,  as  a  sort  of  after-thought,  inserted  the  quota- 
tion from  Malachi  before  going  on  to  that  from 
Isaiah,  But  whatever  be  the  explanation,  it  is  cer- 
tainly a  fact  that  this  is  an  instance  in  which  a  New 
Testament  writer  names  an  Old  Testament  prophet 
and  then,  before  giving  his  words,  records  those  of 
another  prophet  without  mention  of  his  name.  If 
we  had  no  other  sources  of  information,  we  should 
suppose  both  passages  to  be  taken  from  Isaiah. 

If  we  could  accept  the  explanation  sometimes 
given  that  Isaiah,  standing  first  in  the  collection  of 
the  prophets,  gave  his  name  to  the  whole  book,  and 
hence  that  St.  Mark  meant  to  quote  both  prophecies 
under  the   name  of  Isaiah,  the  whole  point  would 

*  Matt.  iii.  3  ;  Luke,  iii.  4. 


294  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS, 

be  yielded,  and  we  could  also  say  that  because 
Moses  wrote  Genesis  the  whole  Pentateuch  was 
called  by  his  name,  and  that  quotations  from  the 
four  last  books  of  it  under  his  name  prove  nothing 
as  to  his  authorship.  But  there  is  absolutely  no 
evidence  that  the  collected  books  of  the  prophets 
were  ever  so  called  or  so  quoted.  The  prophets 
i^prophetcB posteriores)  were  indeed  (with  the  excep- 
tion of  Daniel)  anciently  arranged  as  a  separate 
part  of  the  Hebrew  Bible ;  but,  as  far  as  we  know, 
were  never  called  by  the  name  of  any  single  prophet. 
This  explanation  therefore  may  be  dismissed. 

Before  the  fact  of  these  quotations  can  give  sup- 
port to  the  theory  on  behalf  of  which  it  is  used,  it 
must  be  shown  that  there  was  somebody  who  at- 
tributed the  language  of  Malachi  to  Isaiah.  St. 
Mark  himself  could  not  have  done  so,  nor  could  his 
readers ;  for  all  alike  were  too  familiar  with  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures  to  confound  together  the 
utterances  of  the  first  and  the  last  of  the  prophets, 
separated  from  each  other  by  a  vast  interval  of  time. 
There  is  no  evidence  that  anybody  ever  fell  into 
such  a  mistake.  An  attempt  has  been  made  to  give 
a  parallel  case  by  supposing  a  writer  in  English  to 
have  coupled  together  two  quotations,  one  from 
Shakespeare  and  one  from  Milton,  under  the  name 
of  the  latter;  but  the  case  is  not  parallel.  The 
works  of  no  English  authors  stand  in  the  same  rela- 
tion to  the  English  reader  as  the  Scriptures  of  the 
Old  Testament  did  to  the  early  Christian.  They 
were  his  sacred  books,  the  charter  of  his  salvation, 
the  foundation  of  his  faith.     Such  a  quotation  could 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY.        295 

not  have  passed  unnoticed,  and  we  find  it  did  not 
in  the  earliest  Hterature  we  have  on  the  subject. 
And  even  admitting  the  parallel,  no  intelligent 
English  writer  would  be  supposed  to  have  intention- 
ally cited  Shakespeare  under  the  name  of  Milton ; 
some  other  explanation  would  be  sought  for  such  a 
curious  fact  if  it  had  ever  occurred.  Undoubtedly 
many  persons  have  attributed  the  familiar  words 
"  God  tempers  the  wind  to  the  shorn  lamb "  to 
Scripture,  without  special  mention  of  any  Scripture 
author;  but  in  doing  so  they  have  supposed  that 
the  words  of  Sterne  were  actually  those  of  Scrip- 
ture. There  are  but  two  ways  in  which  it  can  be 
supposed  that  St.  Mark  intended  to  attribute  the 
words  of  Malachi  to  Isaiah  :  (i)  Either  he  really 
believed  them  to  be  Isaiah's,  a  supposition  which 
no  one  entertains;  or  else  (2)  they  were  popularly 
so  attributed,  and  he  quotes  them  according  to  the 
popular  opinion  without  thinking  it  worth  while  to 
correct  the  error.  The  last  supposition  is  entirely 
without  evidence  and  is  contrary  to  all  probability, 
and  it  is  only  by  means  of  this  that  the  testimony 
of  the  New  Testament  writers  to  the  authorship  of 
the  Old  Testament  books  can  be  impugned. 

But  it  is  still  urged  that  here  is  a  case  of  wrong 
citation  of  an  author,  and  that,  however  it  may  be 
explained,  it  proves  that  no  reliance  can  be  placed 
on  the  New  Testament  mention  of  the  authors  of  its 
citations.  The  reply  is  the  same  as  in  the  case  of 
St.  Matthew's  citation  of  Jeremiah  ;  at  the  most  it 
would  prove  simply  a  slip  of  the  pen,  and  would 
invalidate  the  New  Testament  testimony  just  in  so 


296  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

far  as  it  proved  errors  of  this  kind  to  be  possible, 
leaving  untouched  all  passages  in  which  such  error 
could  not  be  supposed.  But  it  has  been  shown  in 
the  case  of  Jeremiah  that  there  is  no  necessity  of 
supposing  an  error,  and  although  this  is  a  somewhat 
more  difficult  case,  there  really  is  no  such  necessity 
here.  There  are  instances,  in  regard  to  other 
matters,  in  the  New  Testament  where  two  state- 
ments are  put  together  in  the  brevity  of  utterance, 
which  must  be  separated  in  order  to  make  them  ac- 
curate ;  and  such  ellipses  sometimes  occasion  con- 
siderable difficulties  of  interpretation.  Thus,  St. 
Paul  warns  Timothy  of  certain  false  teachers  "  for- 
bidding to  marry,  to  abstain  from  meats,"  "^  where 
our  version  (and  also  the  Revision)  have  been  ob- 
liged to  insert  the  words  and  commanding  to  convey 
the  evident  meaning  of  the  Apostle.  In  the  ques- 
tion of  Judas,  *'  why  was  not  this  ointment  sold  for 
three  hundred  pence  and  given  to  the  poor  ? "  f 
familiarity  with  the  expression  almost  blinds  us  to 
the  ellipsis,  and  we  fail  to  remember  that  the  oint- 
ment  could  not  have  been  both  sold  and  given 
away,  and  that  what  was  meant  was,  that  it  should 
be  sold  and  the  proceeds  of  the  sale  given  to  the 
poor.  The  elliptical  form  of  statement  concern- 
ing the  use  made  of  the  price  of  Judas'  treachery, 
''  Now  this  man  purchased  a  field  with  the  reward  of 
iniquity,"  %  has  even  been  made  the  ground  of  cavil. 
The  extremely  elliptical  statement  in  the  speech  of 
St.  Stephen,  "  So  Jacob  went  down  into  Egypt,  and 
died,  he  and  our  fathers,  and  were  carried  over  into 
*  I  Tim.  iv.  3.  f  John,  v.  12.  %  Acts,  i.  18. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY.        2gy 

Sychem  and  laid  in  the  sepulchre,"  *  has  occasioned 
endless  exegetical  difficulty,  because  in  the  brevity  of 
the  discourse  the  words  ''  carried  over  into  Sychem" 
grammatically  apply  both  to  Jacob  and  to  '^  our 
fathers,"  while  they  are  meant  only  of  the  latter. 
Similarly,  St.  Mark's  mention  of  Isaiah  is  meant  to 
apply  and  is  true  of  only  one  of  his  quotations, 
while  in  the  brevity  of  his  writing  it  applies  gram- 
matically to  both. 

On  the  whole,  it  cannot  be  maintained  that  St. 
Mark  meant  to  attribute  Malachi's  prophecy  to 
Isaiah ;  and  if  not,  then,  whatever  may  be  the  diffi- 
culty of  explaining  the  passage,  there  is  no  ground 
for  arguing  from  it  that  the  New  Testament  writers 
named  the  authors  of  passages  of  the  Old  without 
intending  to  commit  themselves  to  the  truth  of 
that  authorship.  The  same  conclusion  having  been 
reached  in  regard  to  all  the  instances  alleged,  the 
presumption  remains  that  when  a  passage  of  the  Old 
Testament  is  cited  under  the  name  of  an  author,  the 
writer  or  speaker  intended  to  indicate  the  real  au- 
thorship as  much  as  is  done  in  any  similar  quotation 
in  any  other  writings  at  any  other  time.  Still  it  may 
be  repeated  that  this  is  not  absolutely  determi- 
native of  the  real  authorship  ;  and  that  even  an 
inspired  writer  might  have  quoted  books  under  the 
name  they  popularly  bore  without  committing  him- 
self to  the  reality  of  the  authorship.  This  is  pos- 
sible, and,  except  in  the  few  instances  in  which  the 
validity  of  the  argument  depends  on  the  authorship, 
no  one  would  lose  his  faith  in  the  truth  of  the  New 

*  Acts,  vii.   15,  16. 


298  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

Testament  if  it  could  be  proved  that  it  sometimes 
quotes  under  the  name  of  the  currently  supposed, 
rather  than  of  the  real  author  ;  but  it  is  important 
to  observe  that  the  presumption  that  the  rightful  au- 
thors are  given  remains,  and  that  the  burden  of  proof 
rests  upon  the  other  side.  Moreover,  this  argument 
presupposes  that  the  books  m.  question  were  at  the 
time  of  the  Christian  era  popularly  attributed  to  the 
authors  named,  and  this  fact  is  of  no  small  impor- 
tance in  the  question  of  the  real  authorship. 

Since,  however,  this  fact  has  been  called  in  ques- 
tion, especially  as  regards  the  Pentateuch,  and  it  has 
been  alleged  that  there  is  no  sufficient  evidence  that 
this  was  popularly  attributed  to  Moses  in  New 
Testament  times,  it  may  be  well  to  look  a  moment 
at  the  effect  of  the  opposite  supposition.  This  is 
only  for  the  sake  of  the  argument,  for  it  is  believed 
that  the  evidence  is  ample  that  not  only  the  Penta- 
teuch, but  the  Old  Testament  books  generally,  as  far 
as  the  authorship  is  known,  were  attributed  to  the 
same  authors  in  those  days  as  they  have  been  since, 
and  there  is  no  evidence  that  in  ancient  times  any 
other  opinion  was  ever  held.  But  admit  the  allega- 
tion, and  what  follows  ?  That  the  New  Testament 
writers  went  out  of  their  way  to  mention  the  authors 
of  the  Old  Testament  books  when  they  were  not 
known  to  those  whom  they  addressed.  In  this  case 
there  would  be  clear  and  express  testimony  to  the 
authorship  which  could  hardly  be  gainsaid  without 
destroying  altogether  the  reliability  of  the  New 
Testament.  Why  should  our  Lord  have  said  that 
Moses  *'  wrote    you  this    commandment,"   if   there 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY.        299 

were  no  common  belief  that  he  had  done  so,  except 
to  assert  the  fact  ? 

With  the  presumption  therefore  undiminished, 
that  the  authors  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament 
are  the  real  authors  of  the  books  cited,  the  following 
list  may  be  given,  in  addition  to  those  already  spe- 
cially discussed,  of  quotations  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment with  the  names  of  the  authors.  Some  passages 
are  included  which  give  no  express  quotation,  but 
which,  nevertheless,  more  or  less  fully  testify  to  the 
authorship ;  but  simple  references  to  facts  recorded 
in  the  Old  Testament  are  excluded. 

One  further  remark  is  necessary  :  what  is  sought 
is  testimony  to  the  substantial  authorship,  not  to  the 
mere  writing  down  of  the  words.  For  our  present 
purpose  it  is  of  no  consequence  whether  Moses  actu- 
ally wrote  down  the  laws  of  the  Pentateuch  or 
whether  he  delivered  them  orally  to  his  successors. 
The  point  is  that  the  New  Testament  recognizes 
these  laws  as  emanating  from  him. 

I.  The  Pentateuch,     (i)  In  the  words  of  our  Lord. 

Matt.  viii.  4;  Mark,  i.  44;  Luke,  v.  14.     ''Offer 
the  gift  that  Moses  commanded."    Lev.  xiv. 

"    xix.  8.    "  Moses  suffered  you  to  put  away 

your  wives."     Deut.  xxiv.  I. 
Mark,  vii.   10.  "  Moses  said.   Honor  thy  father 

and  thy  mother."    Ex.  xx.  12  ;  Deut.  v.  16. 
"    x.  3,  5.  "What  did  Moses  command  you? 

....  For  your  hardness  of  heart  he  wrote 

you  this  commandment."    Like  Matt.  xix.  8. 


300  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

Mark,  xii.  26  ;  Luke,  xx.  37.    "  Have  ye  not  read 
in  the  Book  of  Moses,"  etc.     Ex.  iii.  6. 

Luke,  xvi.  29,  31.  "They  have   Moses  and  the 

Prophets If  they  hear  not  Moses  and 

the  Prophets." 
"    xxiv.  44.   ''  Beginning  at  Moses  and  all  the 
prophets.  He  expounded  unto  them  in  all 
the  Scriptures,"  etc. 

John,  V.  45-47.  ''  If  ye  believed  Moses,  ye  vi^ould 
believe  Me  ;  for  he  wrote  of  Me.  But  if  ye 
believe  not  his  writings,  how  shall  ye  believe 
My  words  ?  "  (In  this  case  the  argument 
seems  to  require  that  the  leader  and  law- 
giver "  on  whom  ye  have  set  your  hope  " 
should  have  been  the  author  of  the  "  writ- 
ings "  referred  to.) 
**  vii.  19.  *' Did  not  Moses  give  you  the  law?" 
"  vii.  22,23.  "  For  this  cause  hath  Moses  giv- 
en you  circumcision That  the  law  of 

Moses  may  not  be  broken."  Lev.  xii.  3. 
(In  both  these  cases  there  is  an  emphasis  on 
the  fact  that  Moses  gave  the  law.) 

(2)  In  the  words  of  inspired  men. 

A  few  passages  may  first  be  mentioned  in  which 
it  is  not  expressly  said  that  Moses  wrote  the  words 
quoted,  but  merely,  as  under  the  previous  head,  that 
they  were  spoken  to  him  or  by  him.  They  might 
have  been  recorded  by  some  one  else,  but  as  they  are 
contained  in  the  writings  commonly  known  as  "the 
writings  of  Moses,"  the  natural  inference  is  that  he 
was  considered  the  author  of  the  record. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY.        10\ 

Acts,  vii.  22-26.  ''And  Moses  ....  would  have 
set  them  at  one  again,  saying,  Sirs,  ye  are 
brethren  :  why  do  ye  wrong  one  to  another  ?" 
Ex.  ii.  13-15. 
"  vii.  31-34.  The  account  of  what  the  Lord 
said  to  Moses  at  the  bush,  taken  from  Ex.  iii. 

Rom.  ix.  15.  "  For  He  saith  to  Moses,  I  will 
have  mercy  on  whom  I  will  have  mercy,"  etc. 
Ex.  xxxiii.  19. 

Heb.  viii.  5.  '*  Moses  was  admonished  of  God. 
....  See,  saith  He,  that  thou  make  all 
things  according  to  the  pattern  showed  to 
thee  in  the  Mount."  Ex.  xxv.  40  ;  xxvi.  30. 
"  ix.  19, 20.  "When  every  commandment  had 
been  spoken  by  Moses  ....  according  to 
the  law,  he  took  the  blood  ....  saying,"  etc. 

Another  class  of  passages  refers  to  ''  the  law,"  or 
to  some  particular  law,  of  Moses.  It  is  possible  that 
these  laws  might  have  been  given  by  Moses  and 
orally  handed  down  until  they  were  recorded  by 
some  one  else;  but,  as  before,  as  there  was  at  the 
time  a  written  body  of  laws  passing  under  the  name 
of  Moses,  and  in  many  instances  expressly  declaring 
that  they  were  written  by  him,  the  natural  inference 
is  that  this  is  referred  to,  and  that  its  authorship  is 
attributed  to  Moses. 

Luke,  ii.  22.     **  Her  purification    according  to 

the  law  of  Moses."     Lev.  xii.  2. 
John,  i.  17.     "The  law  was  given  by  Moses." 
Acts,  xiii.  39.     "  Could  not  be  justified  by  the 
law  of  Moses." 


302  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

Acts,  xxi.  21.  "  They  are  all  zealous  of  the  law 
....  and  that  thou  teachest  ....  to  forsake 
Moses,  saying  that  they  ought  not  to  cir- 
cumcise/' etc. 

Heb.  vii.  14.     "  As  to  which  tribe  Moses  spakje 
nothing  concerning  priests." 
"    X.  28.    "  He  that  despised  Moses'  law  died." 

The  remaining  passages  all  speak  expressly  of 
something  which  Moses  wrote  or  said,  or  else  of  a 
writing  under  his  name. 

Acts,  iii.  22,  23.  "  Moses  truly  said  unto  the 
fathers,"  quoting  Deut.  xviii.  15,  etc. 

"  vii.  37.  "This  is  that  Moses  which  said 
unto  the  children  of  Israel,"  quoting  the 
same  passage. 

"  XV.  21.  *'  Moses  ....  hath  in  every  city 
them  that  preach  him,  being  read  in  the 
synagogues  every  Sabbath  day." 

"    xxviii.  23.     *'  Persuading  them  concerning 
Jesus,  both  from  the  law  of  Moses,"  etc. 
Rom.  X.  5.     "  Moses  describeth  the  righteous- 
ness which   is   of  the  law,"  quoting    Lev. 
xviii.  5. 

**  X.  19.  **  Moses  saith,"  quoting  Deut.  xxxii. 
21. 

1  Cor.  ix.  9.    "  It  is  written  in  the  law  of  Moses," 

quoting  Deut.  xxv.  4. 

2  Cor.  iii.  15.     "Until  this  day   remaineth  the 

same  veil  untaken  away  in  the  reading  of 
the  Old  Testament  ....  but  even  unto  this 
day  when  Moses  is  read." 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY.        303 

If  one  half  as  many  passages  could  be  found  of 
the  same  period  attributing  the  Athenian  legislation 
to  Solon,  the  world  would  consider  that  its  author- 
ship was  settled  beyond  all  peradventure,  at  least  in 
the  opinion  of  the  writers  making  the  quotations.  It 
is  indeed  curiously  argued  that  while  these  passages 
may  establish  the  authenticity  of  the  particular  pas- 
sages cited,  they  go  no  further,  and  do  not  show  that 
the  writers  making  them  believed  the  legislation  of 
the  Pentateuch  as  a  whole  to  be  the  work  of  Moses, 
and  that  the  references  to  "the  law  of  Moses"  and 
"  the  book  of  Moses,"  etc.,  when  there  was  at  the 
time  a  well-known  law  and  book  passing  under  his 
name,  do  not  prove  that  the  writers  accepted  that 
work  as  his.  If  so,  nothing  could  suffice  short  of  the 
quotation  of  the  whole  law.  But,  surely,  he  would 
be  thought  an  over-nice  critic  who  argued  that  a  quo- 
tation, under  the  name  of  Cicero,  from  the  well-known 
work  '^De  SenectuteJ'  recognized  only  Cicero's  author- 
ship of  the  particular  sentence,  and  not  of  the  trea- 
tise as  a  whole.  On  such  principles  the  authorship 
of  no  ancient  work  could  ever  be  established. 

It  remains  to  mention  some  passages  in  which 
Moses  is  spoken  of  in  the  New  Testament  by  unin- 
spired persons  as  the  giver  of  the  law,  the  receiver 
of  revelation,  or  the  writer  of  the  law.  These  show 
the  common  belief  of  the  time. 

Matt.  xix.  5  ;  Mark  x.  4.  ''  Why  did  Moses  com- 
mand?"— reference  to  Deut.  xxiv.  i. 
"    xxii.  24.     "•  Moses  said,  If  a  man  die,"  etc. 
Deut.  xxv.  5. 


304  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

Mark,  xii.  19  ;  Luke,  xx.  28.  "  Moses  wrote  un- 
to us."     Reference  to  same  passage. 

John,  i.  45.     "  Of  whom  Moses  in  the  law  .  .  .  . 
did  write." 
"    ix.  29.     "  We  know  that  God  hath  spoken 
unto  Moses  "  (in  reference  to  the  law  of  the 
Sabbath). 

Acts,  vi.  I.  "The  customs  which  Moses  deliv- 
ered unto  us." 
"  vi.  II,  13,  14.  "Blasphemous  words  against 
Moses  ....  against  this  holy  place  and  the 
law  ....  shall  change  the  customs  which 
Moses  delivered  us." 

To  these  may  be  added  here  the  words  in  John, 
viii.  5,  "  In  the  law  Moses  commanded  us  to  stone 
such."     Lev.  XX.  10. 

After  the  Pentateuch  no  other  books  are  cited 
under  the  name  of  the  author  until  the  Psalms  are 
reached.  These  are  quoted  ten  times  as  David's  in 
the  following  passages : 

Matt.  xxii.  43,  45  ;  Mark,  xii.  36,  37 ;  Luke,  xx. 
42,  44;  Acts,  ii.  25  ;  ii.  34.  These  have  al- 
ready been  discussed. 

Acts,  i.  16.  "Which  the  Holy  Ghost  by  the 
mouth  of  David  spake  ....  For  it  is  written 
in  the  Book  of  Psalms,"  followed  by  quo- 
tations from  Ps.  Ixix.  25  and  cix.  8. 

"    iv.  24-26.     "  Lord, Who  by  the  mouth 

of  thy  servant  David  hast  said,"  with  quo- 
tations from  Ps.  ii.  i,  2. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY.        305 

Rom.  iv.  6.    "  David  also  describeth  the  bless- 
edness of  the  man,"  etc.  ;  from  Ps.  xxxiv. 
I,  2. 
"    xi.  9.     "And  David  saith  ;  "  from  Ps.  Ixix. 
22,  23. 

Heb.  iv.  7.     "  Saying  in  David  ; "  from  Ps.  xcv. 

7,8. 

Of  the  prophets  Isaiah  is  cited  by  name  far  more' 
frequently  than  all  the  others  together  (17  times), 
and  these  citations  are  nearly  equally  divided  be- 
tween the  former  and  the  latter  part  of  the  book 
that  bears  his  name. 

Matt.  iii.  3  ;  Mark  i.  2,  3 ;  Luke  iii.  4.  "  Spoken 
of  by  the  prophet  Esaias,  saying,"  with 
quotation  from  Isa.  xl.  3.  The  formulas  of 
quotation  are  a  little  more  explicit  in  St. 
Mark  and  St.  Luke,  the  latter  :  "■  As  it  is 
written  in  the  book  of  the  words  of  Esaias, 
the  prophet." 

"  iv.  14.  "  Spoken  by  Esaias  the  prophet, 
saying,"  from  Isa.  ix.  i,  2. 

"  viii.  17.  The  same  formula,  with  quotation 
from  Isa.  liii.  4. 

"  xii.  17.  The  same,  with  quotation  from  Isa. 
xlii.  1-4. 

"  xiii.  14.  Our  Lord  says  "  In  them  is  ful- 
filled the  prophecy  of  Esaias,  which  saith," 
quoting  Isa.  vi.  9,  10.  In  the  parallel  pas- 
sage in  Mark,  iv.  12,  the  same  passage  is  re- 
peated without  any  indication  of  quotation. 
20 


306  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS, 

Matt.  XV.  7 ;  Mark,  vii.  6.  Again  the  words  of 
our  Lord,  "  Well  did  Esaias  prophesy  of 
you,"  quoting  Isa.  xxix.  13. 
Luke,  iv.  17.  *'The  book  of  the  prophet  Esaias 
....  He  found  the  place  where  it  is  writ- 
ten," quoting  Isa.  Ixi.  i,  2. 
John,  i.  23.  *'  As  said  the  prophet  Esaias,"  with 
quotation  from  Isa.  xliii.  3.  This  again  is 
in  the  words  of  our  Lord. 

"  xii.  38.  "  That  the  saying  of  Esaias  the 
prophet  might  be  fulfilled  which  he  spake, 
saying,"  with  quotation  from  Isa.  liii.  I. 

"  xii.  39,  41.  "■  Esaias  said  again,"  "  These 
things  said  Esaias,"  with  quotation  from 
Isa.  vi.  9,  10. 
Acts  viii.  28-33.  "  Read  Esaias  the  prophet." 
....  *4ieard  him  read  the  prophet  Esaias." 
....  "the  place  of  the  Scripture  which  he 
read  was,"  quoting  from  Isa.  liii.  7. 

"    xxviii.  25.     "  Well  spake  the  Holy  Ghost 
by  Esaias  the   prophet  unto    our  fathers, 
saying,"  with  quotation  from  Isa.  vi.  9,  10. 
Rom.  ix.  27.    '■'■  Esaias  also  crieth  concerning  Is- 
rael," quoting  Isa.  x.  21-23. 

"  ix.  29.  "  And  as  Esaias  said  before,"  quot- 
ing Isa.  i.  9. 

"    X.  16.  "•  For  Esaias  saith,"  quoting  Isa.  liii.  i. 

"  X.  20.  "  First  Moses  saith  ....  but  Esaias 
is  very  bold  and  saith,"  quoting  from  Isa. 
Ixv.  I,  2. 

"  XV.  12.  After  several  other  quotations,  it 
is  added,  "And  again  Esaias  saith,"  quot- 
ing Isa.  xi.  10. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY.        307 

It  is  plain  that  while  all  these  prophecies  are 
spoken  of  as  utterances  of  Isaiah,  in  several  cases 
they  are  expressly  distinguished  from  the  utterances 
of  others.  A  far  less  amount  of  testimony  to  the  au- 
thorship of  any  other  ancient  book  would  be  consid- 
ered more  than  enough  to  prove  the  belief  of  the 
writers  in  that  authorship.  The  real  question  is 
whether  it  is  possible  that  they  might  have  been 
mistaken,  and  their  private  opinions  be  distin- 
guished from  the  teaching  of  the  Spirit  who  inspired 
them.  If  this  is  to  be  maintained,  very  clear  evi- 
dence of  the  fact  must  be  presented,  and  meantime 
there  will  be  a  strong  presumption  that  the  books 
actually  proceeded  from  the  persons  to  whom  they 
are  attributed. 

Jeremiah  is  twice  quoted  byname.  Both  of  these 
quotations  have  already  been  discussed  at  length : 
one  is  Matt.  ii.  17,  quoting  Jer.  xxxi.  15,  and  the 
other  is  Matt,  xxvii.  9,  in  relation  to  the  Potter's 
Field,  and  both  read  "  that  which  was  spoken  by 
Jeremy  the  prophet." 

Daniel  is  cited  by  name  once  by  our  Lord,  Matt. 
xxiv.  15, ''The  abomination  of  desolation,  spoken 
of  by  Daniel  the  prophet,  stand  in  the  holy  place," 
referring  to  Dan.  ix.  27  (cf.  xi.  31  ;  xii.  11). 

Hosea  has  two  passages,  ii.  23  and  i.  10,  quoted 
together  under  his  name  in  Rom.  ix.  25-27. 

Joel  is  quoted  by  name  in  Acts,  ii.  16-21  in  the 
speech  of  St.  Peter,  the  passage  being  taken  from 
Joel,  ii.  28-32. 

All  the  quotations  from  the  Old  Testament  with  • 
the  name  of  the  writer  have  now  been  mentioned. 


308  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS.    ' 

In  regard  to  a  very  few  there  are  some  special  diffi- 
culties, but  it  has  been  attempted  to  show  that  these 
do  not  bear  upon  the  present  question.  About  the 
authorship  of  several  of  them  there  is  no  question  ; 
they  are  simply  attributed  to  the  authors  to  whom 
they  have  always  been  and  still  continue  to  be  attrib- 
uted. In  the  case  of  a  few  others,  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  absolutely  committed,  by  the  course  of  the 
argument,  to  the  authorship  assigned.  The  majority 
of  them,  however,  are  simple  citations  where  the 
question  of  the  particular  authorship  is  not  essential, 
but  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  have  deviated 
from  their  custom  by  mentioning  the  author,  and  in 
several  of  these  cases  recent  criticism  has  called  that 
authorship  in  question.  Do  these  quotations  settle 
the  question  in  favor  of  the  traditional  view  ?  It 
seems  to  me  that  they  do  not  do  so  absolutely ;  i.  e.j 
that  if  it  could  be  distinctly  proved  that  the  books 
in  question  were  not  written  by  the  persons  whose 
names  they  bear,  it  would  still  be  possible  to  explain 
the  mention  of  the  author.  But  the  only  way  of  doing 
this  is  by  assuming  the  common  traditional  author- 
ship at  the  time,  and  this  is  in  itself  a  strong  argu- 
ment for  the  truth  of  that  authorship.  Moreover,  the 
citations  from  the  Pentateuch  and  from  Isaiah  at 
least,  even  when  the  authorship  was  not  essential  to 
the  argument,  do  in  many  cases  imply  a  conviction  on 
the  part  of  the  writers  that  the  authors  they  mention 
were  the  real  authors,  and  to  suppose  that  they  were 
not,  would  involve  grave  difficulties.  Finally,  if  these 
citations  are  considered  inconclusive  as  to  the  ques- 
tion of  authorship,  then  almost  all  historic  evidence 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   TESTIMONY.        309 

of  authorship  of  any  ancient  book  must  be  set  aside  ; 
for  it  is  far  stronger  here  than  in  ordinary  cases. 

The  question  of  inspiration  has  been  purposely 
excluded  from  this  discussion  for  obvio.us  reasons. 
It  is  desirable  to  see  what  is  the  bearing  of  the  evi- 
dence apart  from  this.  When  that  is  considered,  a 
new  factor  of  a  different  kind  is  understood.  With- 
out appeal  to  this,  it  would  seem  that  the  conclusion 
must  be,  that  the  New  Testament  testimony  to  the 
authorship  of  the  Old  Testament  books  in  a  few 
cases  is  absolute  and  decisive ;  in  the  others,  it 
creates  a  presumption  so  strong  that  it  could  only 
be  set  aside  by  most  clear  and  convincing  proofs. 


LECTURE   XIV. 

THE  NEW  TESTAMENT  USE  OF  THE  OLD. 

Quotations  from  the  Old  Testament  made  under 
the  name  of  their  authors  have  been  discussed  in  the 
last  lecture.  It  remains  to  speak  of  the  more  gen- 
eral use  of  the  older  Scriptures  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, whether  by  anonymous  quotations,  or  in  a 
variety  of  other  ways. 

Many  of  the  so-called  quotations  are  without  any 
formula  of  citation,  and  some  of  them,  consisting 
only  of  a  few  words,  may  be  mere  coincidences  of 
expression.  Others  are  expressions  of  the  thoughts 
of  the  New  Testament  wTiter  in  language  famil- 
iar to  him  in  the  sacred  books,  but  perhaps  with- 
out distinct  consciousness  that  he  was  using  the 
words  of  others.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are  ap- 
parent quotations  from  the  Old  Testament  which  do 
not  anywhere  occur  in  this  exact  form,  but  are  rather 
concise  summaries  of  the  teaching  of  various  parts 
of  the  older  Scriptures.  Thus  St.  Matthew  writes, 
"  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  the 
prophets,  He  shall  be  called  a  Nazarene."  *  Our 
Lord  declares,  *'  He  that  believeth  on  me,  as  the 
Scripture  hath  said,  Out  of  his  belly  shall  flow  rivers 
of  living   water."  f     St.  James  quotes,  ''  The   spirit 

*  Matt.  ii.  23.  f  John,  vii.  38. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   USE   OF   THE   OLD.     3II 

that  dwelleth  in  us  lusteth  to  envy.""^  There  are 
several  other  like  passages.  There  are  also  many- 
references  to  characters  and  events  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament (as  to  Jonah)  without  express  quotation. 
It  is  therefore  difficult  to  make  any  precise  state- 
ment of  the  whole  number  of  quotations.  The 
latest  publication  on  the  subject  f  enumerates  nearly 
six  hundred  (592)  quotations  in  the  New  Testament, 
many  of  them  taken  from  different  parts  of  the  Old, 
so  that  by  far  the  larger  part  of  its  books  are  em- 
braced in  the  quotations.if  Gough  §  enumerates  six  " 
hundred  and  fourteen  passages  of  the  Old  Testament 
quoted  in  the  New,  some  of  them  several  times, 
with  thirteen  other  quotations  of  the  more  general 
character  just  mentioned.  A  more  sober  estimate 
would  largely  reduce  these  numbers ;  but  the  very 
difficulty  of  any  precise  statement  shows  how  thor- 
oughly the  minds  of  the  writers  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment were  filled  both  with  the  language  and  the 
thoughts  of  the  Old.  They  used  its  words  to  ex- 
press their  own  thoughts,  and  they  expressed  its 
thoughts  in  their  own  language. 

On  two  occasions  during  the  forty  days  between 
our  Lord's  resurrection  and  ascension  He  taught 
the  disciples  that  the  whole  body  of  the  older^ 
Scriptures   pointed    forward   to    Himself    and    His 

*  James,  iv.  5. 

f  Quotations  in  the  New  Testament.  By  C  H.  Toy.  New  York, 
1884. 

X  Omitting  only  Judges,  Ruth,  Chronicles,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  Esther, 
Lamentations,  Obadiah,  Jonah.  Express  references  are  made  to  the 
events  and  persons  mentioned  in  several  of  these. 

§  The  New  Testament  Quotations.    London,  1855. 


312  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

work  for  the  redemption  of  mankind.  On  the  way 
to  Emmaus  He  upbraided  them  for  their  slowness 
of  heart  in  not  understanding  this,  "  and  beginning 
at  Moses  and  all  the  prophets,  He  expounded  unto 
them  in  all  the  Scriptures  the  things  concerning 
Himself."  *  A  few  weeks  later  and  immediately  on 
the  eve  of  His  ascension.  He  explained  to  them 
**  that  all  things  must  be  fulfilled  which  were  written 
in  the  law  of  Moses,  and  in  the  Prophets,  and  in 
the  Psalms  concerning  Me."  f  Ever  after  they  read 
and  used  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  with  this 
Divine  guidance  as  the  key  to  their  meaning.  It 
would  be  wholly  wrong  therefore  to  interpret  the 
particular  passages  quoted  as  if  they  stood  alone, 
and  had  no  further  meaning  than  the  precise  words, 
in  their  isolation,  must  convey.  They  are  parts  of 
a  preparatory  revelation,  and,  to  be  understood  in 
their  true  sense,  must  be  taken  in  connection  with 
the  whole  teaching  of  that  Dispensation,  and  also 
viewed  in  the  light  thrown  back  upon  them  from 
the  Gospel.  The  New  Testament  quotations  from 
the  Old  may  be  arranged  for  convenience  in  four 
general  classes  as  they  were  used  (i)  for  purposes  of 
argument,  (2)  as  expressions  of  general  truth  be- 
longing alike  to  all  ages,  (3)  as  illustrations,  and  (4) 
simply  as  sacred  and  familiar  words  expressing, 
without  regard  to  their  original  use,  that  which  the 
writers  wished  to  say.  A  volume  would  be  required 
to  treat  them  all  in  detail,  and  many  of  them  have 
been  already  discussed  in  the  previous  chapters.  A 
few  instances  only  will  here  be  treated  under  each 

*  Luke,  xxiv.  26-27.  \^f^'  xxiv.  44-47. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT   USE   OF   THE   OLD.     313 

class  as  examples  of  the  method  to  be  used,  prefer- 
ence being  given  to  those  which  have  occasioned 
difficulties. 

(i)  Quotations  for  purposes  of  argument.  This 
is  in  some  respects  the  most  important  class,  and 
instances  of  it  are  very  abundant.  Our  Lord  re- 
ferred to  the  original  creation  of  the  human  pair  to 
show  that  monogamy  had  from  the  first  been  the 
Divine  will."^  Here  was  a  citation  of  an  old  and 
entirely  familiar  fact  to  prove  that  the  strictness  of 
Christian  morality,  which  seemed  so  new  and  of 
such  unheard-of  severity,  was  really  God's  will 
from  the  first,  and  the  intervening  laxity  had  been 
merely  a  Divine  condescension  to  human  weakness, 
suffered  for  the  hardness  of  men's  hearts.  The 
argument,  once  put  before  the  mind,  is  clear  and 
unanswerable  ;  but  man  might  never  have  discovered 
it  had  it  not  been  pointed  out  to  him. 

Again  :  He  silenced  the  Sadducees,  who  denied 
not  only  the  resurrection,  but  also  said  that  there 
is  "  neither  angel  nor  spirit,"  f  by  quoting  the  lan- 
guage which  God  addressed  to  Moses  at  the  bush, 
"  I  am  the  God  of  Abraham  and  Isaac  and  Jacob."  % 
The  argument  is  certainly  a  subtle  one,  and  its 
force  only  appears  to  us  on  reflection  ;  but  it  was 
conclusive  and  recognized  at  once  as  satisfactory  by 
those  to  whom  it  was  addressed. 

Many  passages  are  cited  to  show  that  the  Old 
Dispensation   looked  forward  to  a  more   complete 

*  Matt.  xix.  4-8  ;  Mark,  x.  4-7  ;  Gen.  i.  27  ;  ii,  18-25. 

f  Acts,  xxiii.  8. 

X  Matt.  xxii.  31,  32;  Mark,  xii.  26-27  ;  Luke,  xx.  37-38;  Ex.iii.  6-8. 


314  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

revelation  to  follow.  Several  of  these  passages  have 
already  been  considered  while  speaking  of  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Old  Testament  on  this  subject.  It  re- 
mains to  note  how  these  and  other  passages  are 
used  in  the  New.  The  important  prophecy  in  Jere- 
miah, xxxi.  31-34,  is  twice  quoted  in  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews,  the  first  *  time  to  show  the  points 
just  mentioned  ;  the  second,  f  to  show  that  full 
forgiveness  of  sin  having  been  the  promise  of  the 
new  covenant,  there  can  no  longer  be  a  necessity 
for  any  "  more  offering  for  sin."  The  argument  is 
conclusive,  although  it  seems  as  difficult  for  Judaizing 
Christians  of  the  present  day  to  appreciate  its  force 
as  it  was  for  the  Jews  themselves  of  old. 

The  words  of  the  prophet  Haggai,  ''  Yet  once,  it 
is  a  little  while,  and  I  will  shake  the  heavens  and 
the  earth,"  %  as  interpreted  by  their  context  and  by 
the  close  of  the  prophecy,  are  used  in  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  §  to  show  both  the  temporary  character 
of  the  Old  Dispensation  and  the  finality  of  the  New. 
The  argument,  as  the  passages  appear  in  our  version, 
is  clear,  when  the  reference  of  the  prophecy  to  Mes- 
sianic times  is  once  admitted,  as  in  all  fairness  it 
must  be.  But  it  is  objected  that  the  point  of  the 
Apostle's  argument  turns  upon  the  expression  '*  once 
more,"  following  the  Septuagint  translation,  and  that 
these  words  do  not  give  the  sense  of  the  Hebrew. 
Technically  the  objection  is  true.  The  exactly  lit- 
eral rendering  of  the  Hebrew  would  be,  ''  Yet  one, 
it  is  little,  and  I  will  shake,"   etc.  :   but  this  has  no 

*  Heb.  viii.  8-12.      \  \  lb  x.  16-17. 

X  Hag.  ii.  6;  cf.  ver.ly-g,  22,  23.  §  Heb.  xii.  26,  27. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   USE   OF   THE   OLD.     31$ 

meaning,  and  must  be  understood  in  the  light  of  its 
context.  The  prophecy  was  uttered  when  the  people 
were  grieving  over  the  greatly  inferior  glory  of  the 
second  temple.  God  promises  them  that  the  "  glory 
of  this  latter  house  shall  be  greater  than  that  of  the 
former,"  because  He  will  bring  about  a  great  convul- 
sion, and  in  this  house  "  will  give  peace."  He  then 
goes  on  to  say  that  He  "  will  destroy  the  king- 
doms of  the  heathen,"  and  make  Zerubbabel,  as  the 
representative  of  the  house  of  David,  "  as  a  signet." 
The  whole  prophecy,  in  connection  with  the  familiar 
prophecies  that  had  gone  before,  can  only  be  under- 
stood of  the  final  establishment  of  the  universal 
Messianic  kingdom,  so  that  the  words  of  the  Septua- 
gint  used  by  the  Apostle  are  merely  a  summary  of 
the  whole  intent  and  purport  of  the  prophecy.  The 
argument  is  therefore  good,  not  because  the  words 
"  once  more  "  are  actually  in  the  original ;  but  be- 
cause their  meaning  is  necessarily  involved  in  what 
is  said,  and  they  were  thus  so  fully  justified  that  the 
Apostle  had  no  occasion  to  criticise  the  ordinary 
translation. 

The  famous  prophecy  of  Joel,*  beginning,  '*  It 
shall  come  to  pass  afterward  that  I  will  pour  out  my 
Spirit  upon  all  flesh,"  was  quoted  by  St.  Peter  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost  and  applied  to  the  outpouring 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the  Christian  disciples;  and  it 
was  claimed  that  this  was  the  meaning  of  the  proph- 
ecy.f  The  last  clause  of  it  is  also  quoted  by  St.  Paul 
as  a  proof  of  the  intended  universality  of  the  Chris- 
tian offer  of  salvation  :  "  For  there  is  no  difference 


*JoeI,  ii.  28-32.  f  Acts,  ii.  16-21, 


3l6  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

between  the  Jew  and  the  Greek For  whosoever 

shall  call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord  shall  be  saved."* 
The  prophecy  is  given  after  threatenings  of  great 
calamities  coming  upon  the  people.  God  promises, 
after  these,  to  pour  out  His  Spirit  abundantly  in  the 
midst  of  great  manifestations  of  His  power  (repre- 
sented, according  to  ordinary  poetic  language,  under 
the  figure  of  natural  wonders  and  convulsions),  and 
at  that  time  all  who  truly  call  upon  Him  shall  be 
delivered.  No  determination  of  time  is  given  when 
these  things  shall  occur.  From  Joel's  time  to  St. 
Peter's  they  evidently  had  not  occurred,  and  then 
they  had  manifestly  come  to  pass.  It  would  seem 
that  the  sense  in  which  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul  have 
taken  this  prophecy  was  the  obvious  one  under  the 
circumstances.  The  only  point  of  difficulty  is  that 
Joel  speaks  of  these  things  as  coming  ''  before  the 
great  and  terrible  day  of  the  Lord  " — an  expression 
which  we  are  accustomed  to  associate  with  the  time 
of  the  final  judgment.  But  that  this  is  not  the 
prophet's  meaning  is  plain  from  the  fact  that  he 
speaks  of  it  as  a  time  when  deliverance  shall  still  be 
offered  to  every  one  who  "  shall  call  on  the  name  of 
the  Lord."  By  many  commentators  therefore  the 
expression  is  understood  of  the  great  judgment 
upon  the  unbelieving  Jews  in  the  destruction  of  their 
city  and  temple  by  the  Romans.  But  it  seems  more 
probable  that  the  prophet  looked  upon  our  Lord's 
whole  work  as  essentially  one,  that  being  pre-emi- 
nently "  the  great  and  terrible  day  "  when  the  respon- 
sibility of  accepting  or  rejecting  the  offers  of  salva- 
*Rom.  X.  12,  13. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   USE   OF   THE   OLD.     317 

tion  should  be  laid  upon  man.  It  is  in  the  same 
way  that  the  last  of  the  prophets  speaks  of  the 
coming  of  our  Lord's  forerunner.* 

There  are  many  prophecies  of  our  Lord's  coming, 
of  His  acts  and  offices,  of  His  priesthood  and  of  the 
blessings  He  should  bring,  which  are  quoted  in  the 
New  Testament  to  show  that  He  fulfilled  the  pre- 
dictions concerning  Him.  On  these  there  is  not  space 
here  to  dwell.  Many  of  them  were  interpreted  of  the 
Messiah  in  the  Jewish  Targums,  and  undoubtedly 
were  intended  to  refer  to  Him  ;  others  were  only 
known  to  have  this  reference  when  the  event  came 
to  pass  exactly  answering  to  that  which  had  been 
foretold.  The  argument  connecting  prophecy  and 
fulfillment  is  here  something  of  the  same  nature  as 
that  which  assumes  that  two  torn  pieces  of  paper 
which  exactly  fit  together  originally  formed  one 
sheet.  Often,  however,  there  are  not  sufficient  de- 
tails in  the  prophecy  to  admit  of  the  use  of  this 
analogy,  and  then  reliance  must  be  placed  on  the 
scope  and  purpose  of  the  prophet,  on  the  connection 
with  other  prophecies  which  had  gone  before,  on  the 
absence  of  any  other  fulfillment,  on  the  general  in- 
terpretation of  the  time,  andother  indications  which 
will  be  found  in  the  better  commentaries  on  the  pas- 
sages in  question. 

In  all  quotations  which  are  used  argumentatively, 
or  to  establish  any  fact  or  doctrine,  it  is  obviously 
necessary  that  the  passage  in  question  should  be 
fairly  cited  according  to  its  real  intent  and  meaning, 
in  order  that  the  argument  drawn  from   it  may  be 

*  Mai.  iv.  5,  6. 


3l8  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

valid.  There  has  been  much  rash  criticism  of  some 
of  these  passages,  and  the  assertion  has  been  un- 
thinkingly made  that  the  Apostles,  and  especially 
St.  Paul,  brought  up  in  rabbinical  schools  of  thought, 
quoted  the  Scriptures  after  a  rabbinical  and  inconse- 
quential fashion.  A  patient  and  careful  examina- 
tion of  the  passages  themselves  will  remove  such 
misapprehension.  Only  a  few  of  those  which  have 
occasioned  most  difficulty  can  be  taken  as  examples. 
The  prophet  Habakkuk  describes  the  calamities 
coming  upon  the  Jews  through  the  power  and  pride 
of  the  Chaldeans,  and  declares  that  in  the  midst  of 
these  *'  the  just  shall  live  by  his  faith."  *  He  evi- 
dently refers  to  the  Divine  support  and  deliverance 
in  the  midst  of  these  temporal  calamities  which  shall 
be  afforded  to  those  who  calmly  trust  in  God  and 
put  their  whole  confidence  in  Him.  St.  Paul  quotes 
the  passage  with  the  formula  "  as  it  is  written  " 
and  sets  it  forth  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans, t  and 
again  in  that  to  the  Galatians,  %  as  embodying  the 
fundamental  principle  of  Christian  salvation.  It  is 
used  again  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  §  to  show 
that  this  trust  must  still  be  firmly  held  in  the  midst 
of  surrounding  trials  and  afflictions,  and  there  is 
added  a  clause  from  the  Septuagint  (reversing  the 
order  of  the  clauses),  *'  but  if  any  man  draw  back, 
my  soul  shall  have  no  pleasure  in  him,"  which  is  a 
mistranslation  of  the  Hebrew.  In  regard  to  this 
last  passage  there  is  no  difficulty,  for  the  expression 
"the  just  shall  live  by  faith  "  is  plainly  used  in   the 

*  Hab.  ii.  4.  \  Rom.  i.  17. 

X  Gal.  iii.  11.  §  Heb.  x.  38. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   USE   OF   THE   OLD.     319 

same  sense  as  in  the  prophet,  and  the  added  clause 
from  the  Septuagint  is  merely  the  converse  of  this,  and 
might  as  well  have  been  expressed  in  the  Apostle's 
own  words,  if  he  had  not  found  it  ready  to  his  hand 
in  the  translation  in  common  use.  But  it  is  alleged 
that  in  Romans  and  Galatians  the  word  faith  is  used 
in  a  different  sense  and  with  a  different  application 
from  that  of  the  prophet.  Certainly  the  application 
is  different,  but  the  principle  involved  is  the  same 
in  both  cases.  The  word  faith  has  the  sense  in  the 
Old  Testament  of  steadfastness,  faithfulness  in  the 
discharge  of  all  obligations,  just  as  we  use  the  term 
"  a  faithful  man ;  "  in  relation  to  God,  it  means  a 
firm  belief  and  reliance  on  the  Divine  word,  as  the 
context  shows  in  this  passage,  and  as  the  verb  is 
used  in  the  expression  "  Abraham  believed  in  the 
Lord."  It  is  precisely  this  which  St.  Paul  intends  by 
faith.  It  is  not  with  him  a  mere  intellectual  act ;  it 
is  a  principle  which  leads  the  Christian  to  put  his 
whole  trust  in  God  and  accept  His  will  as  the  guide 
of  life.  The  principle  to  which  Habakkuk  prom- 
ised Divine  acceptance  is  that  to  which  St.  Paul 
promises  the  same  thing ;  only  from  the  nature  of 
the  Dispensations,  the  one  should  be  manifested 
more  after  an  earthly,  the  other  more  after  a  spirit- 
ual manner. 

St.  Paul  uses  an  argument  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Galatians  which  has  occasioned  great  difficulty  to 
the  commentators,  and  has  been  often  considered  as 
altogether  unsound.  St.  Jerome  even  goes  so  far  as 
to  say  that  St.  Paul,  in  making  himself  all  things  to 
all  men,  here  made  himself  a  fool  to  the  "  foolish 


320  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

Galatians  !  "  *  The  passage  is,  ''  Now  to  Abraham 
and  his  seed  were  the  promises  made.  He  saith  not, 
and  to  seeds,  as  of  many ;  but  as  of  one,  and  to  thy 
seed,  which  is  Christ."  f  The  difficulty  arises  from 
the  fact  that  the  word  seed,  whether  in  Hebrew  or 
in  Greek,  is  a  collective  term,  just  as  it  is  in  English, 
and  no  inference  can  therefore  be  drawn  as  to  the 
individuality  of  the  subject  of  the  promise  from  the 
use  of  the  singular  number.  Had  it  been  intended 
that  the  promises  should  be  fulfilled  in  the  whole 
multitude  of  Abraham's  posterity,  numerous  "  as  the 
sand  which  is  by  the  seashore,"  the  same  word  would 
still  have  been  used.  The  Chaldee  word  is  also 
collective,  though  it  is  twice  used  in  a  different  sense 
in  the  plural  (Dan.  i.  i2,  16).  %  It  is  plain,  there- 
fore, that  any  argument  founded  upon  the  mere 
number  of  the  noun  used  in  the  promise  can  have 
no  validity  ;  nor  does  St.  Paul  intend  to  base  his 
argument  upon  this,  as  is  so  often  assumed.  This 
is  pre-eminently  a  case  where  a  particular  promise 

*  Apostolus  qui  omnibus  omnia  factus  est,  ut  omnes  lucrifaceret, 
debitor  Grsecis  ac  barbaris,  sapientibus  et  insipientibus,  Galatis 
quoque,  quos  ante  stultos  dixerat,  factus  est  stultus.  Hieron.  in  Gal. 
iii.  16. 

\  Gal.  iii.  16. 

X  The  Chaldee  word  is  used  in  the  Targums  in  the  plural  in  the 
sense  oi  family  in  Gen.  x.  18  ;  Josh.  vii.  14  ;  Jer.  xxiii.  24  ;  but  in 
all  these  cases  the  Hebrew  word  is  HriQI^p  not  'T}\  and  is  variously 
rendered  in  the  Greek.  A  single  instance  of  the  Greek  plural  is  re- 
ferred to  in  4  Mace,  xviii.  i  :  oo  tgjv  ^Aftpocuiaicov  dTtspnidroov 
ditoyovoi  Ttaids'i  ^Idpar/Xtrat  TtsiQsdOs  too  vouw  vovra).  But  it 
may  be  doubted,  Meyer  and  Lightfoot  to  the  contrary  notwithstand- 
ing, whether  ditepfiara  has  not  here  rather  the  sense  of  the  Chaldee 
Y>\virQ\=  families.     At  most,  it  is  a  solitary  and  obscure  example. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT   USE   OF   THE   OLD.     321 

must  be  understood,  as  St.  Paul  understood  it,  in 
connection  with  the  whole  body  of  promises  relating 
to  the  same  point.  When  our  first  parents  were 
told  that  the  Seed  of  the  woman  should  bruise  the 
serpent's  head,*  the  promise  was  from  the  first  under- 
stood of  some  personal  Deliverer  who  should  rescue 
fallen  man  from  the  thraldom  of  the  yoke  of  evil.  At 
Cain's  birth  he  was  rashly  considered  the  expected 
Restorer,  f  Ages  after  this  disappointment,  Noah 
was  expected  to  be  the  one  that  "  shall  comfort  us 
concerning  our  work  and  toil  of  our  hands,  because 
of  the  ground  which  the  Lord  hath  cursed."  %  Dur- 
ing all  the  long  ages  when  man  was  but  falling  more 
deeply  and  hopelessly  under  the  power  of  evil,  this 
promise  must  have  been  the  hope  and  stay  of  every 
devout  and  God-fearing  soul.  It  survived  the  ter- 
rible judgment  of  the  flood.  It  passed  into  the 
expectation  of  the  better  part  of  every  nation. 
Trench  has  well  said,  "■  No  thoughtful  student  of  the 
past  records  of  mankind  can  refuse  to  acknowledge 
that  through  all  its  history  there  has  run  the  hope  of 
redemption  from  the  evil  which  oppresses  it ;  nor  of 
this  only,  but  that  this  hope  has  continually  linked 
itself  on  to  some  single  man.  The  help  that  is 
coming  to  the  world,  it  has  ever  seen  incorporated 
in  a  person."  §  This  expectation  surely  was  not 
wanting  in  the  family  of  Shem,  nor  in  the  race  of 
Eber ;  and  when  Abraham  was  called  out  of  the 
world  to  be  the  father  of  a  chosen  nation,  and  it  was 
promised    him    that    "  in  thy  seed   shall  all  the  na- 

*  Gen.  iii.  15.  f  lb.  iv.  i.  %  lb.  v.  29. 

§  Hulsean  Lectures,  1846.     Lect.  II.  p.   177. 
21 


322  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

tions  of  the  earth  be  blessed,"  he  must  have  un- 
derstood by  it  that  the  long  expected  Redeemer  of 
mankind,  the  Seed  of  the  woman,  was  to  be  born 
of  his  posterity."^  The  traditionary  prophecy  of 
Enoch,  quoted  in  Jude  14,  looks  distinctly  to  a  per- 
sonal Redeemer,  and  so  the  promise  was  certainly 
understood  all  along  through  the  ages  as  its  fulfillment 
was  determined  successively  to  be  in  the  tribe  of 
Judah  and  in  the  family  of  David.  The  later  proph- 
ets, one  after  another,  bring  out  fresh  characteris- 
tics of  this  Redeemer,  but  never  waver  in  the  idea 
that  he  is  to  be  a  Person^  "  a  Priest  after  the  order 
of  Melchisedec,"  f  whose  birth-place  at  Bethlehem  is 
foretold  by  Micah.  :j:  Such  was  the  general  expecta- 
tion of  the  Jews,  derived  from  their  sacred  books, 
at  the  time  of  Christ's  coming,  and  such  was  the  ex- 
pectation even  of  the  Magi,  from  the  East.  §  The 
promise  having  been  so  understood  before  it  was 
confined  to  the  seed  of  Abraham,  having  been  so  re- 
ceived hy  him,  having  been  so  explained  by  all  the 
prophets  age  after  age,  St.  Paul  was  certainly  justi- 
fied in  saying  that  the  promise  was  through  ONE, 
and  that  one  was  Christ.  To  express  this  briefly  in 
English  we  should  say,  "  it  was  not  to  seeds,  as  of 
many;  but  as  of  one,  and  to  thy  seed,  which  is 
Christ,"  without  any  reference  to  the  intrinisic 
etymological  value  of  the  singular  and  plural  of  that 
word.  So  St.  Paul  uses  the  plural  and  the  singular 
of  the  Greek  word,  not  arguing  from  the  force  of  the 

*  From  my  article  on  Gal.  iii.  16,  in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra  for  Jan., 
1879,  p.  26. 

f  Ps.  ex.  4.  X  Micah,  v.  2.  §  Matt.  ii.  2. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   USE   OF   THE   OLD.     3^3 

number,  but  from  the  nature  of  the  promise.  He 
uses  the  singular  and  plural  merely  as  a  convenience 
to  explain  his  meaning. 

Another  argument  of  St.  Paul  in  this  same  epis- 
tle, and  drawn  from  the  same  book  of  Genesis,  has 
been  made  the  ground  of  much  unnecessary  criti- 
cism. After  referring  to  the  story  of  Hagar  and  Ish- 
mael,  of  Sarah  and  Isaac,  he  adds,  ^'  which  things  are 
an  allegory.  For  these  are  the  two  covenants  ;  the 
one  from  Mount  Sinai,  which  gendereth  to  bondage, 
which  is  Agar  (for  this  Agar  is  Mount  Sinai  in  Ara- 
bia), and  answereth  to  Jerusalem  which  now  is,  and 
is  in  bondage  with  her  children  ;  but  Jerusalem  which 

is  above  is  free,  which  is  the  mother  of  us  all 

Now  we,  brethren,  as  Isaac  was,  are  the  children  of 
promise.  But  as  then,  he  that  was  born  after  the 
flesh  persecuted  him  that. was  born  after  the  Spirit, 
even  so  it  is  now,"  *  etc.  There  certainly  is  nothing 
in  the  story  of  Ishmael  and  Isaac  to  show  that 
Christians  rather  than  Jews  were  the  chosen  people 
of  God,  and  to  those  who  suppose  this  to  be  the 
argument  of  St.  Paul  it  must  appear  inconsequen- 
tial. But  his  purpose  is  really  very  different.  He 
has  already  shown  in  the  previous  part  of  the  epis- 
tle that  the  true  children  of  Abraham  are  those  who 
believe  :  these  are  the  children  of  promise  and  are 
free,  while  those  who  are  merely  his  descendants 
after  the  flesh  are  under  the  bondage  of  the  law. 
This  fact  having  been  established,  he  argues  that 
the  relation  between  the  bond  and  the  free  is  always 
the  same  ;  as  it  was  in  the  days  of  Abraham,  so  it  is 

*  Gal,  iv.  21-31. 


324  THE   OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENTS, 

now.  The  argument  is  clear  and  satisfactory,  and 
there  was  a  peculiar  pertinency  in  it  for  his  purpose 
because  in  the  illustration  chosen,  Ishmael  was  act- 
ually the  child  of  Abraham  after  the  flesh.^ 

One  other  instance  of  quotation  for  purposes  of 
argument  may  be  given.  The  author  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews,  in  the  course  of  his  proof  that  all 
other  sacrifices  are  done  away  in  Christ,  writes  as 
follows :  "  Wherefore  when  He  cometh  into  the 
world.  He  saith,  Sacrifice  and  offering  Thou  wouldest 
not,  but  a  body  hast  Thou  prepared  Me  :  in  burnt 
offerings  and  sacrifices  for  sin  Thou  hast  had  no 
pleasure.  Then  said  I,  Lo,  I  come  (in  the  volume 
of  the  book  it  is  written  of  Me)  to  do  thy  will,  O 
God."  f  It  is  well  known  that  the  word  body  is 
taken  from  the  Septuagint  translation,  and  is  not 
found  in  the  original,  %  which  has  instead,  "  Mine 
ears  hast  Thou  opened."  How  the  error  came  about 
it  is  of  no  importance  to  inquire  ;  the  Apostle  quotes 
it  as  it  stood  in  the  version  in  common  use.  It  is  urged 
that  in  so  doing  he  founds  an  important  argument 
upon  a  mere  error  of  translation,  seeking  to  show 
that  the  old  sacrifices  are  done  away  by  the  offer- 
ing of  Christ's  body.  But  this  is  entirely  to  mistake 
his  argument.     His   reasoning  is   really  this  :  sacri- 

*  The  minor  difficulty  arising  from  the  parenthetical  clause, 
"this  Agar  is  Mount  Sinai  in  Arabia,"  disappeais  from  the  fact  that 
the  y^oxAAgar,  according  to  the  weight  of  external  evidence,  should  be 
removed  from  the  text.  It  is  omitted  by  Lachmanu  and  Tischendorf, 
bracketed  by  Tregelles  and  Westcott  and  Hort,  and  its  omission  given 
as  a  marginal  reading  by  the  Revisers.  Lightfoot  (w^ho  rejects  it) 
explains  its  use,  if  it  be  retained,  in  his  Comm.  in  loco. 

t  Heb.  X.  5-7.  X  Ps.  xl.  6-8. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   USE   OF   THE   OLD,     32$ 

fices  were  only  necessary  because  of  sin  ;  they  would 
cease  with  the  perfect  fulfillment  of  God's  will ;  this 
was  predicted  by  the  Psalmist  and  accomplished  by 
Christ.  The  argument  is  concerned  so  entirely  with 
Christ's  obedience  that  in  closing  it  the  Apostle  re- 
peats the  quotation  without  the  clause  containing 
the  word  body  :  his  proof  is  complete  without  it.  In 
his  conclusion  he  does  indeed  use  again  the  word 
body,  but  only  with  reference  to  the  perfect  obedience 
of  Christ  (which  involved  the  sacrifice  of  himself 
upon  the  cross),  not  as  a  part  of  his  quotation  :  "  By 
the  which  will  we  are  sanctified  through  the  offer- 
ing of  the  body  of  Jesus  Christ  once  for  all." 

There  are  hardly  any  other  argumentative  quota- 
lions  presenting  as  great  apparent  difficulties  as  those 
which  have  now  been  discussed.  These  have  been 
purposely  selected,  that  it  may  be  seen  that  these 
difficulties  are  only  apparent,  and  that  in  all  cases 
the  argument  involved  in  the  quotation  is  sound  and 
was  rightly  used.  It  often  happens  that  these  argu- 
ments are  too  keen  to  have  been  readily  perceived 
by  us  without  help  ;  but  that  help  being  given,  they 
become  as  plain  as  those  discoveries  of  science  which 
we  never  could  have  found  out  of  ourselves,  but 
which,  once  made,  every  one  admits. 

At  the  same  time,  in  studying  these  argumentative 
quotations,  it  is  very  necessary  to  note  precisely  the 
point  of  the  argument  for  which  they  are  cited,  and 
not  to  press  them  beyond  the  point  intended.  Thus, 
when  our  Lord  made  claims  for  Himself  at  Jerusa- 
lem which  plainly  involved  His  Divinity,  and  the 
Jews  consequently  proposed  to  stone  Him  "  because 


326  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

that  Thou,  being  a  man,  makest  Thyself  God,"^  He 
foiled  them  by  the  quotation  from  the  Psalm,  *'  I 
said  ye  are  Gods,"  applied  to  human  judges. f  The 
whole  context  of  the  passage  in  the  Gospel  forbids 
us  to  suppose  that  our  Lord  meant  to  disclaim  a 
Divine  character  for  Himself;  and  it  is  evident  that 
the  Jews  understood  Him  still  to  maintain  the  asser- 
tion which  offended  them,  for  "  they  again  sought 
to  take  Him."  But  what  He  did  intend,  and  what 
He  accomplished,  was  to  put  them  in  a  position 
where,  for  the  moment,  they  could  have  no  techni- 
cal right  to  proceed  against  Him.  They  understood 
perfectly  that  He  claimed  to  be  God  ;  but  they  could 
lay  hold  on  no  definite  expression  which  should  give 
them  the  legal  right  to  proceed  against  Him  and 
accomplish  His  death  before  His  work  was  finished. 
It  is  in  this  connection  that  our  Lord  uses  the  ex- 
pression which  is  the  key  to  the  whole  use  of  the 
Old  Testament  in  the  New:  "The  Scripture  cannot 
be  broken. ":[  He  who  acknowledged  no  other  au- 
thority, who  taught  Divine  truth  as  out  of  His  own 
personal  consciousness,  who  hesitated  not  to  speak 
of  the  law  and  the  prophets  as  fulfilled  in  Himself, 
and  to  supersede  the  technical  requirements  of  the 
old  Dispensation  by  the  principles  of  the  new  Reve- 
lation which  He  brought  to  light,  yet,  from  the 
beginning  of  His  ministry,  declared  with  solemn 
asseveration,  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  Till  heaven 
and  earth  pass,  one  jot  or  one  tittle  shall  in  no  wise 
pass  from  the  Law  till  all  be  fulfilled. "§   The  changes 

*  John,  X.  31-36.  f  Ps.  Ixxxii.  6  ;  cf.  Ex.  xxii.  28. 

X  John,  X.  35.  §  Matt.  v.  18. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   USE   OF   THE   OLD.     32/ 

He  would  introduce,  the  fresh  truth  He  would  de- 
clare, the  new  and  higher  morality  He  would  teach, 
would  not  be  a  change  in  the  Divine  wall,  but  a  more 
full  and  perfect  declaration  of  that  will  than 
man  had  before  been  able  to  bear.  And  so  the 
older  Scriptures  were  ever  regarded  by  His  follow- 
ers— as  absolutely  true  and  reHable;  whatever 
might  be  plainly  proved  from  them  rested  upon 
a  rock  which  nothing  could  by  any  means  over- 
throw. 

(2)  But  little  need  be  said  of  the  second  class  of 
quotations,  which  express  truth  belonging  ahke  to  all 
ages.  Sometimes  these  are  made  with  some  formula 
of  quotation,  as  when  it  is  said,  ''Ye  have  forgotten 
the  exhortation  ....  my  son,  despise  not  thou  the 
chastening  of  the  Lord,"^  etc.,  taken  from  the  Prov- 
erbs, and  showing  the  purpose  of  afflictions,  that  in 
these,  as  in  all  else,  "  all  things  work  together  for  good 
to  them  that  love  God."f  This  may  have  been  less 
clearly  understood  of  old,  but  the  declaration  was 
in  God's  word,  nevertheless,  as  the  universal  prin- 
ciple of  His  dealings  with  man.  Sometimes  such 
passages  are  quoted  without  any  formula.  Thus, 
"  God  resisteth  the  proud,  but  giveth  grace  unto  the 
humble,"  is  quoted  from  the  same  book  of  Proverbs  % 
by  St.  James  with  the  formula,  ^*  wherefore  he 
saith,"§  and  by  St.  Peter  without  any  mark  of  cita- 
tion. II  It  is  the  expression  of  a  universal  spiritual 
law.     In  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  the  exhorta- 

*Heb.  xii.  5  ;  Prov.  iii.  11.  12.  f  Rom.  viii.  28. 

X  Prov.  iii.  34.  §  James,  iv.  6.  ||  i  Pet.  v.  5. 


328  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

tion,  ''  Speak  every  man  truth  with  his  neighbor,"  * 
is  taken  from  Zechariah,  f  and  the  following,  "  Be 
ye  angry  and  sin  not,"  :j:  from  the  Septuagint  of 
Psalms.  §  Similar  quotations  are  too  familiar  to  need 
further  discussion. 

(3)  Very  frequently,  passages  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, especially  historical  passages,  are  cited  as 
illustrations  of  the  Apostles'  teaching  and  examples 
for  the  Christians  whom  they  addressed.  Such  quo- 
tations, also,  are  sometimes  introduced  with,  "  It  is 
written,"  or,  "the  Scripture  saith,"  but  oftener  there 
is  a  simple  reference  to  the  history  as  too  familiar 
to  require  any  form  of  citation.  Thus,  St.  Paul, 
having  reminded  the  Corinthians  of  the  history  of 
the  Israelites  at  the  Exodus  and  in  the  wilderness, 
says :  "  Now,  these  things  were  our  examples,"  and 
then,  after  adding  further  particulars,  he  concludes, 
"  Now  all  these  things  happened  unto  them  for  en- 
samples,  and  they  are  written  for  our  admonition."  || 
St.  James  refers  to  Job's  patience  and  God's  mercy 
to  him,  and  to  the  "  effectual  fervent  prayer"  of  Eli- 
jah. ^  St.  Peter  speaks  of  Sarah  as  an  example  to 
Christian  women  ;  **  and  the  example  of  Abraham's 
faith  and  obedience  is  frequently  cited  by  various 
writers,  f  f  The  same  custom  has  been  followed  by 
Christian  teachers  in  all  ages  :  but  the  frequency  of 
such  references  in  the  New  Testament  shows  how 
thoroughly  the  minds  of  its  writers  were  filled  both 
with  its  history  and  its  language, 

*Eph.  iv.  25.       f  Zech.  viii.  16.        if  Eph.  iv.  26,       §  Ps.  iv.  5. 
II  I  Cor.  X.  6-11.  ^  James,  v.  11,  17,  **  i  Pet.  iii.  6. 

ft  E.  g.  John,  viii.  39,  56  ;  Rom.  iv. ;  Gal.  lii.  6-9  ;  Heb.  xi.  8-10, 
17-19  ;  James,  ii.  21-23. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT  USE   OF   THE   OLD.     329 

(4)  The  fourth  class  of  quotations,  in  which  the 
writers  simply  use  the  sacred  and  familiar  words  of 
the  older  Scriptures,  without  reference  to  their  orig- 
inal application,  as  a  fitting  means  for  the  expression 
of  their  own  thoughts,  has  been  sufficiently  discussed 
in  the  lectures  on  prophecy  and  on  the  alleged  double 
sense  of  Scripture.  Caution  is  needed  in  the  con- 
sideration of  such  passages,  lest  we  should  imagine 
that  some  new  meaning  is  intended  to  be  given  to 
the  words  of  the  older  Scripture.  Inspired  applica- 
tion is  very  different  from  inspired  interpretation, 
and  the  two  need  to  be  carefully  distinguished.  The 
thought,  that  "  these  present  events  are  aptly  de- 
scribed by  what  was  spoken  of  old  "  is  by  no  means 
the  same  as  that  "  those  words  of  old  were  designed 
to  predict  what  is  done  now." 

When  we  pass  from  the  particular  subject  of  quo- 
tations to  other  methods  of  the  use  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, the  whole  matter  may  be  summed  up  in  a 
few  words.  The  New  Testament  speakers  and 
writers,  one  and  all,  regard  the  older  Scriptures  as 
sacred  books  to  which  they  may  on  all  occasions 
appeal  with  confidence,  whether  for  doctrine  or  for 
instruction  in  life.  To  them  *'  thus  saith  the  Script- 
ure "  is  an  end  of  controversy.  It  hardly  matters 
whether  in  St.  Paul's  charge  to  Timothy  we  read 
with  the  authorized  version,  "All  Scripture  is  given 
by  inspiration  of  God,  and  is  profitable,"*  etc.,  or 
with  the  Revisers,  "  Every  Scripture  inspired  of 
God,  is  also  profitable,"   etc.      In  either  case  the 

*  2  Tim   iii.  16. 


330  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

whole  context  shows  that  the  reference  is  to  the 
Scriptures  of  the  Old  Dispensation,  and  that  they 
are  regarded  as  an  absolutely  reliable  basis  for 
Christian  teaching.  Similarly  St.  Peter  speaks  of 
the  "  Spirit  of  Christ  "  in  the  prophets  and  of  what 
was  "  revealed  "  to  them,  *  and  again  he  says  that 
"  the  prophecy  came  not  in  old  time  by  the  will  of 
man,  but  holy  men  of  God  spake  as  they  were 
moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost."  f 

With  such  views  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  look- 
ing upon  the  Gospel  as  the  designed  completion  of 
the  Old  Dispensation,  the  New  Testament  writers 
everywhere  plant  themselves  upon  the  Old,  and 
even  in  addressing  the  most  purely  Gentile  converts, 
as  in  the  case  of  the  Galatians,  assume,  as  a  matter 
of  course,  that  in  receiving  Christianity  they  have 
received  the  Old  Testament,  and  will  regard  argu- 
ments drawn  from  it  as  conclusive  of  the  matter  in 
issue,  and  its  teachings  and  examples  as  of  absolute 
moral  obligation.  They  but  followed  the  example 
of  their  Master.  It  is  impossible  to  read  either 
His  teachings  or  the  writings  of  the  Evangelists 
concerning  Him,  without  seeing  that  they  regarded 
the  Scriptures  as  of  Divine  origin,  and  as  revealing 
to  man  authoritatively  the  will  of  God. 

Thus,  just  as  when  we  examined  the  old  Testa- 
ment, we  found  it  ever  looking  forward  to  the 
New  as  its  designed  fulfilment ;  so,  when  we  ex- 
amine the  New,  we  find  it  ever  turning  to  the  Old 
as  its  Divine  warrant  and  authority.     The  two  are 

*  I  Pet.  i.  II-I2.  t  2  Pet.  i.  2i. 


THE  NEW   TESTAMENT   USE   OF   THE   OLD.     33 1 

indissolubly  joined  together  as  parts  of  one  Divine 
and  perfect  whole.  Our  Lord,  seeking  to  lead  the 
Jews  to  the  acknowledgment  of  Himself  and  His 

teaching,  could  say,  "  Search   the  Scriptures 

They  are  they  which  testify  of  Me."  ^ 

"  Novum  in  vetere  latet :  vetus  in  novo  patet" 


*John,  V.  39. 


LECTURE  XV. 

CONCLUSION. 

There  are  a  few  thoughts  which  belong  rather  to 
the  whole  subject  than  to  any  particular  part  of  it, 
and  which  have  merely  been  suggested  in  passing, 
to  which  the  attention  may  be  called  at  the  conclu- 
sion. 

The  unity  of  the  two  Dispensations  was  the  sub- 
ject of  the  first  lecture,  and  in  those  which  followed 
it  was  shown  how  this  essential  unity  has  been 
modified  in  form  and  in  fulness  of  expression  to 
adapt  it  to  the  varying  needs  of  men  under  different 
circumstances,  and  with  differing  degrees  of  spiritual 
enlightenment.  A  corresponding  unity  of  plan  is 
traced  in  nature  in  the  adaptation  of  the  homolo- 
gous parts  of  very  different  creatures.  The  arm  of 
the  man,  the  foreleg  of  the  horse,  the  wing  of  the 
bat  or  the  bird,  and  the  fin  of  the  fish,  are  but  modi- 
fications of  the  same  part  of  the  vertebrate  structure 
adapted  to  their  several  environments;  and  com- 
parative anatomy  has  carried  much  farther  the  anal- 
ogies of  structure  between  different  orders  of  the 
animal  kingdom,  and  even  between  the  different 
kingdoms  of  nature.  The**  unity  of  nature"  and 
the  '*  universal  reign  of  law  "  have  always  attracted 
the  attention  of  thoughtful  observers,  and  with  ad- 


CONCLUSION.  333 

vancing  knowledge  have  become  ever  more  and  more 
firmly  fixed  as  first  principles  of  the  Divine  works. 
Not  only  does  analogy  lead  us  to  expect  the  same 
things  in  Revelation ;  but  when  they  are  found  they 
lead  to  the  same  conclusion  of  a  unity  of  Source. 
Whatever  may  be  the  difficulties  in  nature,  the  unity 
in  Revelation  (extending  through  all  the  ages  of  the 
existence  of  our  race,  and  under  the  vastly  varied 
embodiment  in  human  language  by  men  of  extreme 
divergence  in  character  and  culture  and  living  at 
widely  remote  eras),  points  unmistakably  to  some 
underlying  unity  of  Authorship,  guiding  and  con- 
trolling all  these  human  minds  in  one  common  course 
and  to  one  common  end.  And  this  Authorship  must 
of  necessity  belong  to  a  self-conscious  and  personal 
Being.  In  other  words,  it  shows  that  the  true  Source 
of  the  scriptural  teaching  was  One  Who  sees  the 
end  from  the  beginning,  and  orders  all  things  to  the 
accomplishment  of  His  purposes.  The  facts  which 
have  been  reviewed  concerning  the  ways  and  the 
extent  of  the  preparation  in  the  Old  Testament  for 
the  New,  are  consistent  only  with  the  supposition 
that  the  New  was  distinctly  foreseen  and  regarded 
throughout  the  whole  economy  of  the  Old.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  New  could  only  have  planted 
itself  upon  the  Old  as  it  did,  in  the  conviction  that 
the  same  Being,  "  Who  at  sundry  times  and  in  divers 
manners  spake  in  time  past  unto  the  fathers  by  the 
Prophets,  hath  in  these  last  days  spoken  unto  us  by 
his  Son.*     The  unity  of  the  two  Dispensations  thus 

*  Heb.  i.  I. 


\ 


334  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

leads  directly  to  the  conviction  of  the  Divine  author- 
ity, and  hence  of  the  immutable  truth  of  both. 

This  conviction  brings  us  to  the  perception  of  the 
eternal  verity  of  the  Old  Testament.  This  is  a  point 
which  is  in  some  danger  of  being  overlooked.  A 
preparatory  dispensation  must  necessarily,  in  a  cer- 
tain sense,  be  temporary  ;  and  partial  truth  can  no 
longer  remain  our  highest  standard  when  that  which 
is  more  perfect  has  come.  But  it  does  not  follow 
that  the  preparation  can  ever  be  superseded,  or  that 
this  partial  truth,  viewed  in  its  circumstances  and 
relations,  can  ever  become  untrue.  The  present 
state  is  undoubtedly  a  preparation  for  a  higher  and 
better  one,  and  the  truths  by  which  our  souls  are 
nov/  nourished  unto  eternal  life  we  see  but  as  in  a 
glass,  darkly  ;  yet  that  eternal  life  is  already  begun, 
and  the  higher  truths  of  the  future  are  taught  now 
as  far  as  we  are  able  to  receive  them.  So  also  in  the 
comparison  of  the  Old  Testament  with  the  New.  It 
is  the  same  Divine  will  which  is  expressed  in  them 
both,  and  that  will  is  forever  unchangeable.  It  is 
the  same  Being  Who  was  the  object  of  trust  and 
hope  in  both,  and  to  Whose  holiness  man  must  be 
conformed  that  he  may  enter  into  communion  with 
Him.  This  it  is  easy  to  recognize ;  but  the  point 
we  are  apt  to  overlook  is,  that  the  New  Testament 
teachers,  familiar  with  the  Old  Testament  them- 
selves, and  expecting  their  readers  to  be  familiar 
with  it,  often  do  not  repeat  its  instructions  when 
really  necessary  to  the  understanding  of  their  own 
teachings.  When  John  the  Baptist,  himself  a  priest 
of  Israel,  pointed   to  Jesus  as  "  the  Lamb  of  God 


CONCLUSION.  335 

which  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world,"  *  he  had 
no  need  to  explain  the  nature  of  vicarious  sacrifice 
to  hearers  who  were  accustomed  daily  to  see  the 
lamb  upon  the  altar  in  Jerusalem.  When  St.  Paul 
wrote  to  the  Ephesians  that  Christ  '*  hath  given 
Himself  for  us  an  offering  and  a  sacrifice  to  God  for 
a  sweet  smelling  savour,"  f  there  was  no  occasion  to 
enlarge  upon  the  meaning  of  the  familiar  technical 
language  of  the  Levitical  law.  The  same  thing  is 
true  in  a  great  multitude  of  instances.  The  full 
sense  of  the  New  Testament  teaching  can  only  be 
reached  by  a  thorough  study  of  the  Old  Testament 
upon  which  it  was  founded.  And  the  connection 
between  them,  it  must  be  repeated,  is  not  one  of 
mere  superposition,  in  which  the  Old  is  complete  as 
far  as  it  goes,  and  then  fresh  chapters  of  truth  are 
added  in  the  New ;  but  it  is  a  living  organic  con- 
nection as  between  the  embrj^o  and  the  adult,  the 
seed  and  the  fruit.  It  was  the  same  Being,  the  same 
Divine  will,  the  same  fundamental  principles  of  sal- 
vation, that  were  taught  in  the  one  as  in  the  other  ; 
only  in  the  former  these  were  taught  dimly  and  by 
means  of  types  and  shadows,  as  men  were  able  to 
bear.  These  facts  are  essential  to  the  right  under- 
standing of  Scripture,  and  he  must  sorely  miss  the 
meaning  of  the  New  Testament  who  lets  go  his  hold 
upon  the  conviction  of  the  eternal  truth  of  the  Old. 
There  is  a  correspondingly  important  inference 
in  regard  to  the  New  Testament.  This,  on  the  face 
of  it,  is  a  finality.  It  purports  to  be  the  last  revela- 
tion of  God  to  men   while  upon  earth.     Men   have 

*  John,  i.  29.  f  Eph.  v.  2. 


33^  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS, 

not  always  been  willing  to  acquiesce  in  this. 
Whether  in  the  teachings  of  Mohammed,  in  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Papal  infallibility,  in  various  heretical 
claims  in  various  ages  to  the  gift  of  prophecy,  in  the 
strange  hallucinations  of  Swedenborgianism,  or  the 
coarser  teachings  of  Mormonism,  they  have  shown  a 
craving  for  some  further  authoritative  expression  of 
the  Divine  will.  But  it  results  from  the  relations 
we  have  been  considering  between  the  Old  and  the 
New  Dispensations,  that  no  room  is  left  for  any  such 
further  revelation  here  upon  earth.  The  finality 
which  the  New  Testament  claims  for  itself  is  fully 
borne  out  by  the  character  of  the  preparation  for  it 
in  the  Old.  It  was  a  preparation  in  which  a  great 
number  of  lines  all  converged  to  one  point  ;  they  can 
pass  no  farther  without  again  diverging.  It  was  a 
preparation  for  one  great  fact,  the  very  heart  and 
centre,  and  the  explanation  of  all  that  had  been  done 
since  the  world  began.  The  whole  previous  revela- 
tion was  complete  in  Christ,  and  the  very  suggestion 
of  the  necessity  of  a  further  revelation  is  a  sugges- 
tion of  the  insufficiency  of  His  work.  He  who 
hath  spoken  to  us  by  a  Son,  can  speak  by  none 
higher. 

It  cannot  be  said  as  a  qualification  of  these  state- 
ments that  after  our  Lord  had  returned  *'to  the 
glory  which  he  had  with  the  Father  before  the  world 
was,"  His  disciples  under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  He  had  promised  actually  did  complete  and 
develop  the  revelation  He  had  given.  Their  work 
and  His  ow^n  were  really  one.  The  two  were  con- 
tinuous in  point  of  time  and  in  their  subject-matter, 


CONCLUSION.  337 

the  Apostles  did  but  unfold  the  meaning  of  their 
master's  acts  and  words.  Undoubtedly  there  was 
an  important  progress  in  this,  as  has  already  been 
pointed  out  ;  undoubtedly  we  should  have  a  most 
incomplete  knowledge  of  the  mind  of  Christ,  if  there 
had  been  given  us  only  the  narratives  of  the  Gospels. 
Yet  between  them  and  the  rest  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment the  change  is  not  of  the  same  kind  as  that 
which  marks  the  passage  from  the  Old  Testament 
to  the  New.  There  is  no  new  revelation,  but  a  sim- 
ple unfolding  and  developing  by  His  immediate 
disciples  of  the  meaning  of  the  acts  and  teaching  of 
their  Master.  He  had  Himself  told  them  that  this 
must  be  so ;  that  while  He  was  with  them  in  bodily 
presence  His  work  was  not  yet  complete,  and  had 
warned  them,  "  I  have  yet  many  things  to  say  unto 
you,  but  ye  cannot  bear  them  now,"  and  had  added, 
"When  He,  the  Spirit  of  truth,  is  come  He  will 
guide  you  into  all  truth."  *  When,  therefore,  this 
promised  Spirit  had  come,  and  they  declared  His 
teaching,  they  made  no  new  revelation,  but  only  com- 
pleted the  one  already  begun.  Well  therefore  could 
St.  Paul  declare  this  to  be  a  finality,  and  in  view  of 
the  possible  assertion  of  anything  further,  declare 
with  strong  emotion,  "  Though  we,  or  an  angel 
from  heaven,  preach  any  other  Gospel  unto  you  than 
that  which  we  have  preached  unto  you,  let  him  be 
accursed."  f 

It  remains,  therefore,  that  as  the  connection  be- 
tween the  two  Dispensations  establishes  the  eternal 
verity  of   the    Old,   so    does    it   prove    the    eternal 

*  John,  xvi.  12,  13.  f  Gal.  i.  8. 

22 


338  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

verity  of  the  New  as  its  final  and   complete  fulfil- 
ment. 

A  progress  has  been  distinctly  seen  in  the  whole 
course  of  Revelation.  It  is  a  progress  made  neces- 
sary by  the  fact  that  man  was  unable  to  receive  the 
higher  revelations  until  he  had  been  instructed  and 
elevated  by  the  lower ;  and  therefore  it  is  a  progress 
everywhere  eloquent  of  the  Divine  love  for  man  and 
tender  regard  for  his  capacities  and  his  needs.  Yet 
it  is  not  a  mere  evolution  of  human  thought,  but  is 
distinctly  marked  at  every  stage  as  having  been 
communicated  from  without  and  from  above.  For 
the  revelation  has  always  been  on  the  utmost  verge 
of  man's  capacity  to  receive,  far  beyond  his  ability 
to  invent.  This  was  shown  by  the  revelation  in  the 
remotest  antiquity  of  the  unity  and  holiness  of  God  ; 
it  is  certainly  not  less  conspicuous  in  the  character 
of  Christ.  One  has  but  to  read  the  Apocryphal 
Gospels,  or  in  fact  almost  any  literature  of  that  pe- 
riod, to  see  how  immeasurably  the  character  of  Christ 
as  it  stands  forth  in  the  Gospels,  is  above  any  merely 
human  conception  which  could  be  formed  at  the 
time.  What  is  true  of  His  character  is  true  also  of 
His  teaching:  it  was  the  confession  of  His  enemies, 
"  Never  man  spake  like  this  man."  *  This  fact  of  an 
external  and  Divine  revelation,  once  admitted,  cer- 
tainly has  an  important  bearing  upon  the  discussion 
of  the  order  of  revelation  ;  for  the  progress  of  a  reve- 
lation coming  from  a  Divine  Source  cannot  be 
reduced  to  such  definite  lines  as  if  it  were  entirely 
of  human  origin.     In  the  former  case  fundamental 

*  John,  vii.  46. 


CONCLUSION.  339 

truth  may  be  thrown  out  far  in  advance  of  its  time, 
according  to  a  human  standard,  simply  because  it  is 
fundamental,  and  however  imperfectly  received,  is 
yet  the  necessary  basis  for  the  revelation  of  further 
truth.  On  the  other  hand,  when  men  have  failed  to 
rise  to  the  level  of  a  high  standard  given  them,  they 
may  be  subjected  for  a  time  to  the  training  of  a  less 
perfect  system.  As  the  Israelites,  failing  to  prosper 
under  the  immediate  Divine  government,  were  al- 
lowed a  monarchy,  and  as  not  fulfilling  the  purposes 
of  the  theocracy  in  the  promised  land,  they  were 
driven  into  the  Babylonian  exile  ;  so  when  they  were 
unable  to  understand  and  live  in  the  "  Gospel 
preached  before  unto  Abraham,"  they  were,  because 
of  transgressions,  subjected  to  the  law. 

The  progress  of  revelation  is  therefore  like  the 
progress  in  nature.  On  the  whole  it  is  uniform,  and 
is  ever  from  the  less  to  the  more  perfect.  Yet  it  is 
marked  by  occasional  sudden  changes,  "  sports  "  as 
they  are  called  in  natural  history,  and  there  must 
sometimes  be  a  partial  and  temporary  retrogression, 
a  backward  swing  of  the  pendulum  to  catch  the 
next  cog  of  the  escapement,  a  gathering  up,  as  it 
were,  of  force  for  a  greater  onward  step.  It  is  not  a 
gathering  up  of  the  infinite  Divine  force,  but  of  the 
human,  upon  which  that  must  act.  As  in  nature 
there  must  be  the  lightning,  the  earthquake,  and  the 
volcano  to  restore  the  equilibrium  between  oppos- 
ing forces  with  gradually  strained  tension  ;  so  in 
revelation,  eras  are  to  be  expected,  followed  by  pe- 
riods of  repose.  And  those  periods  of  repose  must 
be  long  in  proportion  to  the  greatness  of  the  fresh 


340  THE   OLD  AND  NEW   TESTAMENTS. 

force  which  has  been  introduced,  and  the  time  re- 
quired for  man  to  assimilate  this  in  his  heart  and 
life.  As  the  hardness  of  the  rock  is  always  an  ele- 
ment in  the  effect  produced  by  the  continual  wear- 
ing away  of  the  water,  so  the  obduracy  of  man  must 
be  an  element  in  the  progress  of  revelation.  Such 
are  the  phenomena  which  the  analogies  of  nature 
would  lead  us  to  expect ;  and  such  are  the  phenom- 
ena which  the  history  of  the  progress  of  revelation 
actually  presents. 

Finally,  the  most  striking  feature  in  all  we  have 
been  considering  is  everywhere  the  Divine  love  and 
condescension  in  the  adaptation  of  revelation  to  the 
wants  and  the  capacities  of  men.  Fallen  man,  in 
a  condition  of  sinfulness  and  spiritual  ignorance,  was 
to  be  raised  and  made  like  to  God,  who  is  perfect  in 
holiness.  To  human  wisdom  this  might  seem  im- 
possible ;  and  in  all  probability,  if  the  full  light  of 
the  Gospel  had  shone  upon  the  antediluvian  patri- 
archs, or  even  upon  such  rough  warriors  as  Gideon 
and  Jephthah,  it  would  but  have  dazzled  and  Winded 
thetn  without  useful  effect.  They  must  be  raised 
little  by  little,  and  meantime,  in  so  far  as  they 
honestly  acted  up  to  the  light  they  had,  there  was 
no  more  difficulty  in  God's  holding  communion  with 
them  than  in  the  Holy  Spirit's  dwelling  in  our  hearts, 
separated  as  they  are  from  His  infinite  holiness  by 
all  our  shortcomings  and  sins.  The  difference  be- 
tween the  best  of  us  and  the  least  of  the  saints  of 
old  is  as  nothing  to  the  distance  by  which  both  are 
separated  from  the  infinite  perfections  of  God.  But 
in  the  gradual  elevation  of  man,  it  is  plain  that  reve- 


CONCLUSION.  341 

lation  must  have  been  always  somewhat  in  advance 
of  his  existing  condition ;  and  particularly  it  was 
necessary  that  from  the  outset  there  should  be  a 
declaration  of  that  which  man  never  has  been  able 
fully  to  learn  for  himself — the  unity,  universality  and 
infinite  holiness  of  God.  If  thi-s  was  too  much  in 
advance  of  the  ideas  of  the  times  for  the  mass  of 
men  to  accept  it  for  many  long  ages,  yet  it  must 
from  the  first  be  proclaimed,  because  it  is  the  neces- 
sary starting  point  and  foundation  of  all  true  religion. 
It  remained,  the  very  gist  and  kernel  of  all  revelation, 
to  be  apprehended,  here  and  there,  by  those  who 
were  able. 

Thus,  little  by  little,  in  tender  love  and  compas- 
sion, the  Heavenly  Father  has  made  Himself  and 
His  will  known  to  man.  The  resulting  progress  has 
been  so  great  that  men  look  back  upon  its  earlier 
stages  with  the  wondering  question  whether  they 
could  really  have  been  revelations  at  all.  But  even 
now,  the  last  great  revelation  has  not  yet  been  fully 
appreciated  and  embodied  in  our  lives.  When  it 
shall  be,  or  when  even  a  sufficient  approach  to  this 
shall  have  been  made,  we  shall  be  transferred  to  that 
higher  stage  of  existence  where,  in  the  open  presence 
of  the  infinite  Mediator,  and  knowing  even  as  we  are 
known,  our  present  knowledge  shall  seem  as  feeble 
as  that  of  the  patriarchs  seems  now  in  comparison 
with  what  has  been  given  to  us.  Then  they  and  we 
alike  shall  stand  in  the  light  which  none  on  earth 
can  know,  and  God  shall  be  "  all  in  all." 


INDEX   OF    SCRIPTURE    TEXTS. 


PAGE 

Genesis,  i.  27 313 

ii.  18-25 313 

iii.  8,  9 II 

iii.  15 153,  233,  321 

iv.  I 321 

iv.  4,  5 Ill 

V.  29 321 

vi.  18 162 

viii.  20 Ill 

ix.  3 •  91 

ix.  9,  12,  13,  15,  16  . .  162 

X.  18 320 

xii.  1 64 

xii.  3 64 

xii.  12 81 

xiv.  14 149 

xiv.  18 138 

XV.  6 25 

XV.  7 64 

XV.  9-21 112 

XV.  18 162 

xvii.  2,  9 162 

xvii.  19 162 

XX.  1 81 

xxi.  22-32 149 

xxi.  30-32 112 

xxii.  13 Ill 

xxiii.  6 .... , 149 

xxv.  33 82 

xxvi.  3 162 


PAGE 

Genesis,  xxviii.  12-15 253 

xxxi.  54 Ill 

xlix.  7 172 

xlix.  10 68,  177 

Exodus,  ii.  13-15 301 

ii.  24 162 

iii 301 

iii.  1 138 

iii.  6 300,  313 

vi.  4 162 

viii.  13 13 

ix.  12 13 

x.  20    13 

xii.  46 242 

xiv.  15 182 

xvii.  II,  12 221 

xviii.  12    138 

xix.  5 139,  162,  233 

xix.  6 35,  114,  151 

XX.  12 299 

XX.  19,  20 35 

xxi.  2 105 

xxi.  5,  6 105 

xxii.  25 98 

xxii.  28 326 

xxiii.  19 97 

xxiv.  7,  8 162 

xxv.  40 301 

xxvi.  30 301 

xxviii.  38 141 


344 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE   TEXTS. 


PAGE 

Exodus,  xxxii 35 

xxxiii.  19 301 

xxxiii.  20 10 

xxxiv,  26 97 

xxxiv.  27 162 

xxxiv.  29-35 233 

Leviticus,  i.  3,  10,  14 118 

iv.  3,  14 121 

iv.  6,  7,  17,  18 120 

iv.  20,  26,  31,  35 141 

iv.  23 121 

iv.  25,  30 120 

iv.  28 121,  134 

V.  7 121 

v.  10,  13 141 

,  V.  II 121 

V.  11-13 lOI 

V.  14- vi.  7 122 

vii.  16,  17 119 

vii.  29 119 

vii.  35 141 

X.  3 141 

X.  17 141 

xi 92 

xi.  32-34 93 

xi.  32-35 93 

xi.  37,  38 93 

xii.  2 301 

xii.  3 300 

xiv.  1-31 299 

XV.  5-10 93 

XV.  19-23 93 

XV.  26,  27 93 

xvi.  7,  8 123 

xvi.  11-14 122 

xvi.  14,  15 120 

xvi.  15-17 122 

xvi.  18,   19 122 

xvi.  20-22 123 


PAGE 

Leviticus,  xvi.  25 123 

xvi.  26,  28 123 

xvi.  27 123 

xviii.  5 302 

xix.  9,  10 98 

xix.  18 18,  230 

xix.  18,  24 102 

xix.  19 97 

XX.  10 304 

xxi.  17 141 

xxii.  23 119 

xxiii.  10 118 

xxiv.  5,  6,  9 102 

XXV.  36,  37 98 

xxvi.  9,  25,  42,  44,  45.  162 

Numbers,  ix.  3,  4 114 

XV.   30,  31 121 

xvi.  5 141 

xvi.  32,  33 23 

xxi.  8,  9 211 

xxii. -xxiv 138 

xxiii.  19 10 

xxiii.  21 21 

xxiv.  17 69 

xxiv.  17,  18 271 

xxviii.  9,  10 102 

Deuteronomy,  v.  2 162 

V.  16 299 

vi.  5 102 

viii.  3 34 

ix.  9 162 

X.  12 102 

xi.  I,  13,  22 102 

xii.  5,  II,   14,   18,   26,  129 

xiv 92 

xiv.  21 97 

xiv.  23-25 . .    129 

XV.  12 105 

XV.  13,  14 105 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE    TEXTS, 


345 


PAGE 

Deuteromony,  xv.  16-18 105 

XV.  20 129 

xvi.  2-8 114 

xvi.  2,  6,  7,  15,  16. . .    129 

xvii.  8,  10 129 

xviii.  6. . .    129 

xviii.  15 65,  235,  302 

xix.  9 102 

xix.  21 18 

xxii.  6,  7 98 

xxii.  10 97 

xxiii.  19 98 

xxiv.  1 299,  303 

xxiv.  21 98 

XXV.  4 96,  188,  302 

XXV.  5 303 

XXV.  17-19 23 

xxvi.  2 129 

xxix.  I,  12,  14 162 

XXX,  6 102 

xxxi.  II 129 

xxxii.  21 302 

Joshua,  vii.  14 320 

ix.  27 129 

x.  24 85 

xix.  1-9 173 

Judges,  i.  6,  7 85 

ii.  1 162 

iii.  18-23 84 

iv.   18-21 86 

v.  24-27 86 

viii.  T3-17 84 

I  Samuel,  ii.  10 69,  286 

viii.  6,  7 161 

viii.  6,  20 151 

viii.   7 151 

xiii.   10-14 139 

XV.   2 23 

XV.  22 123 


PAGE 

1  Samuel,  xv.  29 10 

2  Samuel,  iii.  38 182 

*  vii.  3,  8-12 161 

vii.   12-16 66,  76,  285 

xii.  1-4 195 

xii.  II,  12 88 

1  Kings,  viii.  63 119 

xxii.  19-23 13 

2  Kings,  ii.  3,  5,  15 160 

iv.   I,  38 160 

vi.  1 160 

ix.    1 160 

1  Chronicles,  iv.  36,  39-43. .  174 

xvi.    17 162 

xvii.  2,  4 161 

xxviii.  3 69 

2  Chronicles,  xxvi.  16-21. . . .  139 

XXX.  15-19 115 

XXXV.  II 115 

xxxvi.   21 105 

Job,  xi.  7,  8 II 

Psalms  ii 244,  282 

ii.  I,  2    191,  304 

iv.    5 328 

xvi 282 

xvi.   7-10 281 

xxii 238,  282 

xxxiv.  I,  2 305 

xxxiv.  19,  20 242 

xxxv.  19 192 

xl.  6-8 124,  324 

xii.  9 240 

Ii.  2-4 222 

Ixix 282 

Ixix.   4 192,  240 

Ixix.  9 240 

Ixix.   22,  23 305 

Ixix.  25 304 

Ixxviii.  2 241 


34^ 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE    TEXTS. 


PAGE 

Psalms,  Ixxxix.  3,  4 76 

xcv 282 

xcv.   7,  8 189,  305 

cix 282 

ex 282 

ex.  1 177.  280,  281 

ex.  4 180,  287 

exxxii.  II 76 

Proverbs,  iii.  11,  12 327 

iii.   34 327 

XXV.   21,  22 188 

Eeelesiastes,  v.   i 124 

Isaiah,  i.  9 306 

i.   II 124 

i.  25-27 154 

ii.  3 76 

iv.  2,  4 155 

vi.  9,  10 305,  306  bis 

ix.  I,  2 172,  305 

X.  21-23 306 

xi.    1-9 155 

xi.   10 306 

xxvi.  2,  3,  12,  13 155 

xxvii.  9 155 

xxviii.  16,  17 155 

xxix.   13 126 

xxix.   19-24 155 

xxxii.  I,  16 155 

xxxiii.  5,  14,  15,  24..    155 

xxxiv.  xxxv 245 

xl.  3 262,  291,  305 

xlii.   1-4 305 

xlii.  1-4,  6 155 

xliii.  3 306 

xliii.  25 155  bis 

xliv.  9 289 

xliv.  22 155  bis 

xlv.-xlviii 175 

xlv.  8 155 


PAGE 

Isaiah,  xlvi.  12,  13 155 

Iii.   II 183 

Iii.   13-liii.  12 70,  155 

liii.  1 306  bis 

liii.  4 305 

liii.  7 306 

Ivii.   15-18 155 

Iviii.  6,   7 155 

lix.  20 156 

Ix.  21 155 

Ixi.    I,  2 306 

Ixi.  8 155 

Ixv.  I,  2 306 

Ixvi.  3 125 

Jeremiah,  iii.  6 71 

iii.   16 71 

vi.   20 125 

X    16 289 

xi.   I 162 

xviii.    II 289 

xxiii.  24 320 

XXX.  9 236 

xxxi.  15,  183,  263,287,  307 

xxxi.   16 263 

xxxi.   31 76 

xxxi.  31-34... 71,  162,  314 

xxxi.  33,  34 71,  95 

xxxi.   34 156 

xxxiii.   8 156 

xxxiii.  17,  18 267 

xxxiv.  9,  14 105 

Ezekiel,  iv 237 

xi.  19 156 

xi.  19,  20 72 

XX 237 

xxi.  27 68 

xxxiv.  23,  24 236 

xxxvi.  25-27 73,  156 

xxxvii.  24,  25 236 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE   TEXTS. 


347 


PAGE 

Ezekiel,  xlvii.  1-12 156 

Daniel,  i.  8-16 92 

i.  12,  16 320 

ii.  34,  35 153 

ii.  39-45 72 

vii.  16-27 72 

ix.  24 72,  156 

ix.  27 307 

xi.  31 307 

xii.  8-13 250 

xii.  II 307 

Hosea,  i.  10 307 

ii.  23 307 

iii.  5 236 

vi.  6 loi,  268 

viii.  13 124,  237 

ix.  3 237 

ix.  6 237 

xi.  1 184,  242 

xi.  5 237 

xiii.  14 183,  264 

xiv.  4 156 

Amos,  iv.  13 289 

V.  22,  24 124 

V.  26 205 

vii.  14,  15 161 

ix.  II,  12 78,   190 

Jonah,  ii.  i 234 

"i 23 

Micah,  iv.  2  ss 76 

V.  2 171,  322 

vi.  6-8 125,  268 

vii.  19 156 

Habakkuk,  ii.  4 318 

Haggai,  i.  9-11 126 

"•6 314 

ii.  6,  7 73 

ii.  7-9,  22,  23 314 

ii.  21,  22 73 


PAGE 

Zechariah,  iii.  3-5,  8,  9 74 

vi.  10-13 244 

vi.  11-13 74 

vii.,  viii.,  viii.  19 74 

viii.  16 328 

ix.  9    74 

x.  8,  10 74 

X.  10,  II 249 

xi.  12,  13 287 

xiii.  I 39 

xiii.  9 157 

xiv.  9,  20,  21 75 

Malachi,  i.  6,  7 126 

i.  II 75,  126 

ii.  12,  13 126 

iii.  I 236,  291 

iii.  I,  2 157 

iii.  2,  3 75 

iii.  3,  4 126 

iii.  8 126 

iv.  2,  5 75 

iv.  2-6 157 

iv.  5 176 

iv.  5,  6 236,  317 

Matthew,  i 76 

ii.  1-6 171 

ii.  2 322 

ii.  15 184,  242 

ii.  17 307 

ii.  17,  18  . .  .183,  263,  287 

ii.  23 310 

iii.  2 157 

iii.  3 293,  305 

iii.  9 234 

iv.  4 34,  178 

iv.  14 305 

iv.  23 166 

V.  17 3 

V.  18 3,  326 


348 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE    TEXTS, 


PAGE 

Matthew,  v.  19 4 

V.  21,  27,  33 , . . .  8 

V.  38,  39 18 

V.  44 230 

viii.  4 299 

viii.  17 305 

ix.  10-13 269 

ix.  13 loi 

ix.  27 76 

ix.  35 166 

X.  5 77 

xi.  14 236 

xii.  I,  2,  7 269 

xii.  3-5 4 

xii.  6 102 

xii.  7 loi 

xii.  9-13 166 

xii.  17. 305 

xii.  39,  40 178 

xii.  40 234 

xiii.  12 269 

xiii.  14 305 

xiii.  35 241 

xiii.  54 166 

XV.  7 306 

XV.  22 76 

XV.  24 77 

xvi.  4 178 

xvii.  12,  13 236 

xix.  4-6 4,  227 

xix.4-8 3^3 

xix.  5 303 

xix.  8   16,  299 

xix.  19 230 

XX.  30,  31 76 

xxi.  9 76 

xxii.  15-46 4 

xxii.  24 303 

xxii.  31,  32 313 


PAGB 

Matthew,  xxii.  37-40 3 

xxii.  39 230 

xxii.  42 76 

xxii.  43,  45 280,  307 

xxiv 245 

xxiv.  15 307 

xxiv.  15-22 174 

xxiv.  37-39 227 

XXV.  29 .' 269 

xxvi,  56 265 

xxvii.  9 287,  307 

Mark,  i.  2,  3 291,  305 

i.  21,  39 166 

i-  44 299 

ii.  25,  26 4,  102 

iv.  12 305 

iv.  25 269 

vii.  6 306 

vii.  10 299 

X.  3,  5 299 

X.  4 303 

X.  4-7 313 

X.  6-9 4,  227 

xii.  19 304 

xii.  26 300 

xii.  26,  27 313 

xii.  29-31 3 

xii.  36,  37 280,  304 

xiii 245 

xvi.  15 77 

xvi.  15,   16 57 

Luke,  i.  17 236 

i.  32,  33 3 

i.  41,  67 37 

i.  72,  73 3,  162 

i.  76,  77 236 

ii,  22 301 

ii.  38 70 

iii.  4 293 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE    TEXTS. 


349 


PAGE 

Luke,  iv.  15 166 

iv.  16-21 4 

iv.  17 306 

iv.  33-35 166 

V.  14 299 

vi.  3,  4 4 

vii.  5 i66 

viii.  18 269 

xi.  30 234 

xiv.  15 49,  67 

xvi.  17 3 

xvi.  29,  31 300 

xvii.  20,  21 158 

xvii.  26,  27 227 

xviii.   1-8 229 

XX.  28 304 

XX.  37   300 

XX.  37.  38 313 

XX.  42,  44 280,  304 

xxi 245 

xxiv.  26,  27 4,  312 

xxiv.  27 177,  284 

xxiv.  44 300 

xxiv.  44-47 312 

John,  i.  17 301 

i-  23 306 

^-  29 335 

i-  29,  36 137 

i-  45 304 

^-  51 254 

"•17 240 

iii-  13-18 56 

iii.  14 56 

iii.  14.  15 211 

iv.  I,  2 55 

iv.  10,  14,  26 56 

iv.  22 77 

»v.   25 49,  65 

V.  12 296 


John,  V.  39 63,  331^ 

V.  45-47 300 

vi 56 

vi.  48,  49 187 

vi.  59 166 

vii.  19 300 

vii.  22,  23 300 

vii.  38 310 

vii.  39 37 

vii.  46 338 

viii.  5 304 

viii.  39,  56 328 

ix.  29 304 

X.  31-36 326 

sM-  35 4.326 

xii.  38 306 

xii.  39,  41 306 

xiii.  18 240 

xiv.-xvi 56 

xiv.   6 133 

XV.  25 192,  240 

xvi.  4 56 

xvi.  12,   13 54,  337 

xviii.   36 159 

xix.  24,  28,  36 265 

xix.  36 242 

XX.  25 204 

Acts,  i.  6 57,  158 

i-   16   304 

i.  16,  20 5 

i.   18 296 

ii.  16-21 307 

"•25 304 

ii.  25-31 281 

ii-   25,  34 281 

ii.  30-36 5 

ii.  34 281,  304 

iii.  18 5 

iii.  22,  23 302 


350 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE   TEXTS. 


PAGE 

Acts,  iii.  24 283 

iii.  25   162 

iv.   13-26 191 

iv.  24-26 304 

iv.  25,  26 5 

vi.   1 304 

vi.  II,  13,  14 304 

vii.    15,  16 297 

vii.  22-26 301 

vii.  23 278 

vii.  31-34 301 

vii.  37  65,  302 

vii.  43 205 

vii.  44 205 

vii.   52 : 106 

viii.   28-33   306 

ix.   22 5 

X 77 

xi.   19  77 

xiii.    21 278 

xiii.  39 301 

xiii.  42,  43 166 

xiii.  46 77 

xiv.   22 159 

XV 2t8 

XV.  10 162 

XV.  15 190 

XV.  16,  17 78 

XV.   21 302 

XV.  28,  29 91 

xvii.  2,3 5 

xvii.  30 16 

xviii.  28 5 

XX.  35 278 

xxi.  21 302 

xxiii.   8 313 

xxiii.   25. . . 205 

xxvi.  6,  22,  23 5 

xxvi.  22,  23 284 


PAGE 

Acts,  xxviii.  23 302 

xxviii.  25 306 

Romans,  i.  17 318 

i.   18-23 164 

iv 328 

iv.  3 25 

iv.   6 305 

V.  12-19 227 

V.  14 206 

vi.    17 206 

vii.  10,  12,  14 163 

viii.  3 38 

viii.  15 165,  167 

viij.  28 291 

ix.-xi 78 

ix.    15 301 

ix.   25  27 307 

ix.    27 306 

ix.   29 306 

X.  5 8,  302 

X.  12,  13 316 

X.  16   305 

X.  19 301 

X.  20 306 

xi.  9 305 

xi.    16-24 229 

xii.  1 141 

xii.  5 168 

xii.  20 188 

xiii.   9   - 230 

xiv.  17 159 

XV.  12 306 

XV.  16 146 

I  Corinthians,  v.  7 115 

V.  7,  8 186 

vi.    16 227 

ix.  9 96,  188 

X.   2 2X6 

X.  6,  II 205 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE   TEXTS. 


351 


PAGE 

1  Corinthians,  x.  6-1 1 328 

X.  17 168 

xi.   8 227 

xii.  2 6 

xiii.   12 53 

XV.  21,  22 227 

XV.  44-46 227 

XV.  50 159 

XV.  54,  55 236 

XV.  56 183 

2  Corinthians,  i.  22 167 

ii.    15,  16 13 

iii.   13-16 233 

V.  5 167 

V.  17 76 

vi.  17,  18 183 

Galatians,  iii.  6 25 

iii.  6-9 328 

iii.  8 7 

iii.   II 318 

iii.  12 8 

■«»  iii.  16 320 

iii.  17 162 

iii.  17,  19 25 

iii-  19 7,  35 

iii.   21 106 

iii.  23 95 

iii.  24 7,  26 

iv.  6 167 

iv.  9 162 

i   iv,  21-31  ...181,  229,  323 

iv.  24 163 

V.  14 230 

Ephesians,  i.  14 167 

ii.  II 6 

ii.  15   163 

ii.  19-22 169 

iv.  25 328 

iv.  26 328 


PAGE 

Ephesians,  v.  2 335 

Philippians,  iii,  17 205 

Coiossians   i.  13 159 

ii.  14,  15-   26 

iii.  3 248 

1  Thessalonians,  i.  7 205 

iv.  16,  17 60 

2  Thessalonians,  iii.  9 205 

1  Timothy,  ii.  11-14 227 

iv.  3 296 

iv.  12 205 

V.  18 96,  188 

vi.  15,  16 9 

2  Timothy,  i.  10 37,  168 

iii.  8 277 

iii.  16 37,  329 

Titus,  ii,  7 205 

Hebrews,  i.  i 5,  28 

i-  14 254 

ii.  18 289 

iii.  15-iv.  13 189 

iv.  7 305 

V.  I.. 138 

V.  2 141 

V.  4 140,  224 

V.  6 143 

V.  II,  12 202 

vi.  I 232 

vii.  14 302 

vii.  16 143 

vii,  21 143 

vii,  25 143,  148,  2?4 

vii,  27 144 

vii.  28 143 

viii.  I,  2 138 

viii.  3 143 

viii.  5 205,  301 

viii,  8-12 314 

ix.  5 203 


352  INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE   TEXTS. 

PAGE  PAGE 

Hebrews,  ix.  8 99     Hebrews,  xiii.   10 146 

ix.  12 144    James,  i.  25 162 

ix.  13 123                 ii.  8 230 

ix.  16,  17 112                 ii.  21-23 328 

ix.  19,  20 301                 ii.  23 25 

ix.  22 loi,   130                 ii.  25 228 

ix.  24 224                 iv.  5 311 

ix.  26 144                 iv.  6 327 

X.  1-3 135                 V.  II,  17 328 

X.  4 24,  135     I  Peter,  i.  10 63,  283 

x.  5-7 324                i.  10-12 251 

X.  10 144                 i.  II 37 

X.  12-14 135                 i.  II,   12 230 

X.  12 T44                 i,  12 192 

X.   14 142,   143                 iii,  6 328 

X.  16,  17 314                  iii.  20,  21 227,  229 

X.  28 302                  V.   3 205 

X.  38 318                  V.  5 327 

xi.  7 227      2  Peter,  i.  II 159 

xi.  8-10 328                 i.  21 37,  230 

xi.  17-19 328                 ii.  5 228 

xi.  25,  26 239                 iii.   5-7 228 

xi.  31 228     I  Jobn,  iv.  II,  12 167 

xii.  21 278     Jude,   14,  15 276 

xii.  22-24 59     Revelation,  xiv.  8 249 

xii.  26,  27 314                 xvi.  19 249 

xii.  27 73                 xvii.  5 249 

xii.  28 159                 xviii.  2,  10,  21 249 


^ER: 


m 


^M4^ 


JUL  0 


-MH-i 


-m 


1999i 


0-2QS3£?= 


12  1999 


a. 


i;^: 


•.-V  V.  I 


,  ,,r^ 


.^• 


'7  •.-<;^^''  ~' 


BS2387 .G22 

The  Old  and  New  Testaments  in  their 


Princeton  Theological  Semmary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00078  8879 


i 


